https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190116 Where the excise classification dispute was finally resolved in favour of the accused, the criminal complaint could not survive. The products were held to be ayurvedic medicines falling under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, not cosmetics or toilet preparations under Chapter 33, and that finding was affirmed when the Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal. With the departmental adjudication set aside and the foundational allegation of misclassification removed, the prosecution resting on the same facts and evidence had no sustainable basis. The respondents' discharge was therefore upheld. en-us Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Feb 2017 18:07:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190116 Where the excise classification dispute was finally resolved in favour of the accused, the criminal complaint could not survive. The products were held to be ayurvedic medicines falling under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, not cosmetics or toilet preparations under Chapter 33, and that finding was affirmed when the Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal. With the departmental adjudication set aside and the foundational allegation of misclassification removed, the prosecution resting on the same facts and evidence had no sustainable basis. The respondents' discharge was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190116