https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341412 The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. The tribunal found that the goods in question were actually manufactured by another entity, not the appellant, based on evidence presented. It concluded that the clearance value of the other entity should not have been combined with the appellant's value, rendering the excise duty demand unsustainable. The decision emphasized the necessity of providing concrete evidence and distinguishing between goods manufactured by different entities to accurately determine excise duty liabilities. en-us Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 May 2017 18:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341412 The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. The tribunal found that the goods in question were actually manufactured by another entity, not the appellant, based on evidence presented. It concluded that the clearance value of the other entity should not have been combined with the appellant's value, rendering the excise duty demand unsustainable. The decision emphasized the necessity of providing concrete evidence and distinguishing between goods manufactured by different entities to accurately determine excise duty liabilities. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341412