https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74519 In a repair-removal dispute, duty could not be sustained on suspicion that air-conditioners returned after repair were different goods or that fresh manufacture had occurred. The department had to prove by cogent evidence that the goods cleared were not the same goods received for repair, or that manufacture in fact took place; declarations, inspection, and the absence of effective departmental action weakened the demand, and conjecture or delay in repairs was insufficient. en-us Mon, 02 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:23:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74519 In a repair-removal dispute, duty could not be sustained on suspicion that air-conditioners returned after repair were different goods or that fresh manufacture had occurred. The department had to prove by cogent evidence that the goods cleared were not the same goods received for repair, or that manufacture in fact took place; declarations, inspection, and the absence of effective departmental action weakened the demand, and conjecture or delay in repairs was insufficient. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 02 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74519