Marketability as a for excise duty failed where compounded rubber had limited shelf life and no proven marketability.

Compounded rubber captively consumed by the assessee was found not to be proved marketable because it had a very limited shelf life, required immediate use after mixing, and lacked stability. Since marketability is a necessary condition for excisability, the burden rested on the Revenue to establish that the product was a marketable commodity. The record contained no material to rebut the assessee's case, and the Revenue produced no evidence to displace the finding that marketability had not been shown. On those facts, the product was not liable to excise duty and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether compounded rubber manufactured and captively consumed by the assessee was a marketable commodity liable to excise duty and whether the Revenue had discharged the burden of proving marketability.

Analysis: The record showed that the compounded rubber had a very limited shelf life, required immediate use after mixing, and lacked stability. The adjudicating authority had accepted that there was no material to rebut the assessee's contention that the product was not marketable. In the appeal, the Revenue produced no evidence to controvert that finding. Since marketability is a necessary condition for excisability, the burden lay on the Revenue to establish it, and that burden was not discharged.

Conclusion: The item was not proved to be a marketable commodity and was therefore not liable to be treated as an excisable product on the facts of the case. The appeal was rejected.

---