Burden of proving manufacture in excise lies on the department; appellate reliance on undisclosed technical material is impermissible.

In excise matters, where the department alleges that a product emerges from manufacture and is commercially distinct, it must prove that assertion with evidence before the adjudicating authority. The absence of evidence showing what happened to the hot rolled strips before the cold rolled strips were produced was fatal to the department's case. That deficiency could not be cured for the first time at the appellate stage by relying on technical publications or standards not previously disclosed to the assessee or tested by the primary fact-finding authority. The article therefore states that technical material must be examined at the adjudicatory level before liability can be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether cold rolled steel strips produced from hot rolled steel strips were proved to be the result of manufacture and therefore liable to excise duty at the rate asserted by the Excise Authorities.

Analysis: The Excise Authorities bore the burden of proving, by evidence before the adjudicating authority, that the goods emerged from a process of manufacture and were commercially distinct. The record contained no evidence of what happened to the hot rolled strips before the cold rolled strips were produced. That deficiency could not be cured at the stage of argument by relying for the first time on technical publications or standards without prior disclosure to the assessee and without placing such material before the primary fact-finding authority. Technical material had to be tested at the adjudicatory level, where the Tribunal's technical expertise could be applied.

Conclusion: The alleged process of manufacture was not proved, and the assessee's cold rolled strips were not liable to excise duty at the rate claimed by the Excise Authorities.

Ratio Decidendi: In excise matters, where the department asserts that a product is obtained by manufacture and is commercially distinct, the department must prove that fact with evidence before the adjudicating authority, and it cannot cure the absence of such proof for the first time by relying on technical publications at the appellate stage.

---