https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98101 In disputes over exemption under Notification No. 202/88-C.E., where the assessee states that inputs were purchased from the open market, the burden remains on the Revenue to prove that those inputs were non-duty paid. A mere statement without a clear admission that manufacture was from non-duty paid inputs is insufficient to deny the exemption or sustain duty demand and penalty. On the facts noted, the Revenue produced no evidence to discharge that burden, so the exemption benefit could not be denied and the adverse demand and penalty were set aside. en-us Fri, 05 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:05:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98101 In disputes over exemption under Notification No. 202/88-C.E., where the assessee states that inputs were purchased from the open market, the burden remains on the Revenue to prove that those inputs were non-duty paid. A mere statement without a clear admission that manufacture was from non-duty paid inputs is insufficient to deny the exemption or sustain duty demand and penalty. On the facts noted, the Revenue produced no evidence to discharge that burden, so the exemption benefit could not be denied and the adverse demand and penalty were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98101