https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364696 The Tribunal's interpretation of "removal" and "place of removal" under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was accepted where the assessee had not removed the goods from the godown and the removal had already been effected by another entity that had discharged excise duty on that removal. On that factual basis, no duty recovery was warranted before alteration of registration. The High Court found no error in the Tribunal's view and upheld the order. en-us Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364696 The Tribunal's interpretation of "removal" and "place of removal" under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was accepted where the assessee had not removed the goods from the godown and the removal had already been effected by another entity that had discharged excise duty on that removal. On that factual basis, no duty recovery was warranted before alteration of registration. The High Court found no error in the Tribunal's view and upheld the order. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364696