Marketability test for fabricated items defeated excise duty where the Revenue failed to prove they were sold as goods.

Fabricated ducting, chutes, supporting structures, platforms and staircases were held not to be liable to central excise duty because marketability was not proved. The Revenue failed to show, with material evidence, that the items were capable of being bought and sold in the market as such. A bare assertion that they were movable or could be assembled elsewhere was insufficient. The proprietor's statement only showed fabrication for a customer and did not establish removal of goods in a marketable condition. On that basis, the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the goods fabricated by the respondent were excisable goods liable to central excise duty in the absence of proof that they were marketable.

Analysis: The appeal turned on marketability of the fabricated items. The Revenue did not produce material to show that the ducting, chutes, supporting structures, platforms, staircases and related items were capable of being bought and sold in the market as such. A mere assertion that the items were movable and could be assembled at another site was insufficient without supporting evidence. The proprietor's statement only showed fabrication for the customer and did not establish that the goods were marketable or had been removed as goods from a workshop to a marketable condition.

Conclusion: The goods were not proved to be marketable excisable goods, so central excise duty was not leviable and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

---