https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167400 The Appellate Tribunal held in the case that the demand raised by the Assistant Collector for excise duty was invalid as it was based on a conflicting classification that had been set aside by the Appellate Collector. The Tribunal also ruled that the Appellate Collector lacked jurisdiction to revise orders of another Appellate Collector on the same matter. The correct classification of products under specific tariff items was confirmed, rendering the demand unsustainable. The issue of exemption under certain notifications was not addressed, and the debate on the nature of manufacturing activity was not essential to the appeal's resolution. en-us Fri, 30 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:32:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167400 The Appellate Tribunal held in the case that the demand raised by the Assistant Collector for excise duty was invalid as it was based on a conflicting classification that had been set aside by the Appellate Collector. The Tribunal also ruled that the Appellate Collector lacked jurisdiction to revise orders of another Appellate Collector on the same matter. The correct classification of products under specific tariff items was confirmed, rendering the demand unsustainable. The issue of exemption under certain notifications was not addressed, and the debate on the nature of manufacturing activity was not essential to the appeal's resolution. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167400