https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791888 Transferred factory goods captively consumed in the manufacture of dutiable final products could not be subjected to a second duty demand where the record showed no clandestine removal, suppression of facts, or revenue loss. The sale of the unit as a going concern and the purchaser's later excise registration supported the transfer transaction, and the alleged false sale arrangement was rejected. Although commencing activity before amendment of registration amounted to a procedural lapse attracting the cited rules and notification, that lapse did not justify the disputed duty demand. The confirmed demand was set aside, while the limited penalties for procedural contravention remained undisturbed. en-us Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791888 Transferred factory goods captively consumed in the manufacture of dutiable final products could not be subjected to a second duty demand where the record showed no clandestine removal, suppression of facts, or revenue loss. The sale of the unit as a going concern and the purchaser's later excise registration supported the transfer transaction, and the alleged false sale arrangement was rejected. Although commencing activity before amendment of registration amounted to a procedural lapse attracting the cited rules and notification, that lapse did not justify the disputed duty demand. The confirmed demand was set aside, while the limited penalties for procedural contravention remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791888