https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267124 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that no new product emerged from the mixing process of UDMH and HH, termed UH25, for rocket fuel/propellant. Consequently, the duty liability on UDMH used within the factory was discharged by the appellant, leading to the appeals being allowed with consequential relief granted. The decision emphasized the necessity of demonstrating a change in character or use to classify products as distinct for duty imposition. en-us Wed, 27 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267124 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that no new product emerged from the mixing process of UDMH and HH, termed UH25, for rocket fuel/propellant. Consequently, the duty liability on UDMH used within the factory was discharged by the appellant, leading to the appeals being allowed with consequential relief granted. The decision emphasized the necessity of demonstrating a change in character or use to classify products as distinct for duty imposition. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267124