https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209255 The tribunal set aside the order stating that repairing and maintaining old D.G. sets did not amount to manufacturing, remanding the case for reevaluation. The appellants were allowed to introduce certificates from experts to determine the percentage of new components used in the process, which was deemed crucial in assessing the nature of the activity. The tribunal found that the lower authorities had not considered this evidence, directing the adjudicating authority to issue a new order after reevaluating the evidence and giving the appellants a fair opportunity to present their case. The appeal was resolved in favor of the appellants, leading to a fresh examination by the adjudicating authority. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209255 The tribunal set aside the order stating that repairing and maintaining old D.G. sets did not amount to manufacturing, remanding the case for reevaluation. The appellants were allowed to introduce certificates from experts to determine the percentage of new components used in the process, which was deemed crucial in assessing the nature of the activity. The tribunal found that the lower authorities had not considered this evidence, directing the adjudicating authority to issue a new order after reevaluating the evidence and giving the appellants a fair opportunity to present their case. The appeal was resolved in favor of the appellants, leading to a fresh examination by the adjudicating authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209255