https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50413 Pre-notice duty debit could not remain in the demand, and amounts wrongly included for a cancelled invoice and reprocessed goods already subjected to duty were excluded. Duty-paid raw materials found in excess stock were treated as non-excisable goods, so confiscation and redemption fine under Rule 173Q were not sustainable. Penalty was confined to the admitted Modvat credit issue because there was no specific finding or proof that the excess raw materials were held with intent to evade duty. The order was therefore modified to vacate the unsustainable demand and confiscation, while reducing the penalty. en-us Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:38:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50413 Pre-notice duty debit could not remain in the demand, and amounts wrongly included for a cancelled invoice and reprocessed goods already subjected to duty were excluded. Duty-paid raw materials found in excess stock were treated as non-excisable goods, so confiscation and redemption fine under Rule 173Q were not sustainable. Penalty was confined to the admitted Modvat credit issue because there was no specific finding or proof that the excess raw materials were held with intent to evade duty. The order was therefore modified to vacate the unsustainable demand and confiscation, while reducing the penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50413