<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (4) TMI 58 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75646</link>
    <description>Unvulcanised sandwiched fabric assembly used captively in footwear manufacture is excisable only if it has an independent commercial identity and is marketable in the condition in which it emerges. Revenue bears the burden of proving actual marketability or capability of sale; mere manufacture, captive use, or a theoretical possibility of sale is insufficient. Material such as test reports must establish that the intermediate product is commercially known and saleable without further processing. Where the evidence instead shows that it is only an intermediate article lacking independent commercial identity, it is not &quot;goods&quot; for central excise purposes, and duty demand and penalty cannot be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 15:38:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 58 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75646</link>
      <description>Unvulcanised sandwiched fabric assembly used captively in footwear manufacture is excisable only if it has an independent commercial identity and is marketable in the condition in which it emerges. Revenue bears the burden of proving actual marketability or capability of sale; mere manufacture, captive use, or a theoretical possibility of sale is insufficient. Material such as test reports must establish that the intermediate product is commercially known and saleable without further processing. Where the evidence instead shows that it is only an intermediate article lacking independent commercial identity, it is not &quot;goods&quot; for central excise purposes, and duty demand and penalty cannot be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75646</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>