Marketability of intermediate goods denied excise duty where Revenue failed to prove the product could be sold in the market.

Intermediate excise duty depends on marketability, and the Revenue must prove that the product is capable of being bought and sold in the market. In this matter, no market enquiry, specification details, testing, or expert opinion was produced to establish that friction cloth or rubberized cotton fabric at the intermediate stage was marketable. Earlier decisions treating friction cloth as non-marketable were followed, while the Revenue's contrary authorities were distinguished on facts. The product was therefore not proved to be marketable and was not excisable.

---

---

Issues: Whether 'friction cloth' or rubberized cotton fabric emerging at an intermediate stage was marketable and therefore excisable.

Analysis: Excise duty on an intermediate product depends on its marketability. The Revenue carried the burden to establish that the product was capable of being bought and sold in the market. On the facts, the Revenue produced no material such as market enquiry, specification details, testing, or expert opinion to prove marketability. Prior decisions holding friction cloth to be non-marketable were followed, and the contrary reliance placed by the Revenue was distinguished on facts.

Conclusion: The product was not proved to be marketable and was therefore not excisable. The appeals were liable to fail.

---