https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341454 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the Filter Cake from the affluent plant was not marketable and did not meet the criteria for excisability. The appellant's lack of intention to manufacture the Filter Cake, coupled with the clarification that the goods did not align with the necessary criteria for excisability, led to the dismissal of the Revenue's claim. The Tribunal emphasized that the introduction of the term "capable of marketing" in 2008 was crucial in assessing the marketability of goods for excisability purposes. Both appeals were allowed based on the presented findings and legal interpretations. en-us Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Nov 2017 14:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341454 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the Filter Cake from the affluent plant was not marketable and did not meet the criteria for excisability. The appellant's lack of intention to manufacture the Filter Cake, coupled with the clarification that the goods did not align with the necessary criteria for excisability, led to the dismissal of the Revenue's claim. The Tribunal emphasized that the introduction of the term "capable of marketing" in 2008 was crucial in assessing the marketability of goods for excisability purposes. Both appeals were allowed based on the presented findings and legal interpretations. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341454