https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93960 The Tribunal rejected all appeals by the Revenue, determining that the yeast propagated by the respondents was not excisable under Central Excise Duty. The decision was based on the lack of marketability of the yeast due to its short shelf life and the Revenue's failure to prove its capability for buying and selling in the market. The judgment focused on the manufacturing process, marketability, burden of proof, and legal precedents to conclude that the yeast in question did not qualify for excise duty. en-us Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:03:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93960 The Tribunal rejected all appeals by the Revenue, determining that the yeast propagated by the respondents was not excisable under Central Excise Duty. The decision was based on the lack of marketability of the yeast due to its short shelf life and the Revenue's failure to prove its capability for buying and selling in the market. The judgment focused on the manufacturing process, marketability, burden of proof, and legal precedents to conclude that the yeast in question did not qualify for excise duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93960