https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250132 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the duty payment exceeding the credit taken for labeling activities amounted to credit reversal, as per the Narmada Chematur case precedent. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the duty demands and penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority, emphasizing that no additional credit payments were necessary due to the excess duty payment. The Revenue's argument that labeling does not constitute manufacturing and thus does not entail duty or credit implications was rejected, supporting the appellant's position based on the excess duty payment. en-us Wed, 02 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250132 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the duty payment exceeding the credit taken for labeling activities amounted to credit reversal, as per the Narmada Chematur case precedent. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the duty demands and penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority, emphasizing that no additional credit payments were necessary due to the excess duty payment. The Revenue's argument that labeling does not constitute manufacturing and thus does not entail duty or credit implications was rejected, supporting the appellant's position based on the excess duty payment. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250132