https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119778 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal confirming demands under Section 11A, interest, and penalty for manufacturing Aluminium composite panels, ruling that the cutting and routing activities did not create new goods distinct from imported ACP sheets. The burden of proving marketability was emphasized, with the Tribunal finding no evidence of trade parlance supporting the creation of a new product. Citing various judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the cutting and routing process did not amount to manufacturing under the relevant tariff heading, leading to the decision that the impugned order was not legal and proper. en-us Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Oct 2021 14:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119778 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal confirming demands under Section 11A, interest, and penalty for manufacturing Aluminium composite panels, ruling that the cutting and routing activities did not create new goods distinct from imported ACP sheets. The burden of proving marketability was emphasized, with the Tribunal finding no evidence of trade parlance supporting the creation of a new product. Citing various judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the cutting and routing process did not amount to manufacturing under the relevant tariff heading, leading to the decision that the impugned order was not legal and proper. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119778