Tribunal rules in favor of appellant, setting aside excise duty demand due to lack of evidence

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for excise duty on the Sugar Syrup due to lack of evidence establishing its marketability. The appeals were allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.

---

---

Issues:
The issue involves whether the Sugar Syrup prepared inside the factory is subject to levy of excise duty as an intermediate product.

Summary:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing Biscuits on a job work basis, also produces Sugar Syrup as an intermediate product consumed in the manufacture of Biscuits. The Department contended that the Sugar Syrup, being marketable and having a shelf-life due to the addition of citric acid, is excisable. A show cause notice was issued demanding duty, interest, and penalties. The appellant argued that the Sugar Syrup was not marketable and thus not liable for excise duty, citing relevant case law.

The Tribunal analyzed the contentions and evidence presented. It was noted that the Department had not provided evidence to show that the Sugar Syrup was a marketable product. Previous decisions were referenced to establish the non-exigibility of excise duty on non-marketable products. The classification of the product under sub-heading 1702 90 90 was also challenged due to lack of evidence regarding the fructose content required for such classification.

Referring to past judgments, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of establishing marketability based on the product's condition when it emerges. The Tribunal found that the Department had not proven the marketability of the Sugar Syrup. Citing relevant precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the demand for excise duty could not be sustained and set it aside, allowing the appeals with consequential relief.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for excise duty on the Sugar Syrup due to lack of evidence establishing its marketability. The appeals were allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.

---