https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115625 The appellate judge upheld the duty liability on Appellant No. I, as the activities amounted to manufacture. Penalties were imposed but reduced due to the genuine dispute on the manufacturing activities, with no finding of wilful evasion. The penalties were set at Rs. 10,000/- for Appellant No. I and Rs. 5,000/- for Appellant No. 2. Interest on the duty amount was to be paid as per Section 11AB provisions. The impugned order was modified, and the appeals were disposed of with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 06 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 May 2012 15:38:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115625 The appellate judge upheld the duty liability on Appellant No. I, as the activities amounted to manufacture. Penalties were imposed but reduced due to the genuine dispute on the manufacturing activities, with no finding of wilful evasion. The penalties were set at Rs. 10,000/- for Appellant No. I and Rs. 5,000/- for Appellant No. 2. Interest on the duty amount was to be paid as per Section 11AB provisions. The impugned order was modified, and the appeals were disposed of with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115625