https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341626 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the pharmaceutical manufacturer in the appeal, overturning the Order-in-Appeal. It held that duty liability did not arise on samples drawn for in-house testing and analysis within the factory premises, as they were not cleared for home consumption. The manufacturer's discharge of duty based on production costs was deemed sufficient, rejecting the revenue authorities' argument for duty based on MRP minus abatement. Citing a Bombay High Court judgment, the Tribunal emphasized the distinction when goods are consumed or destroyed within the factory during testing, ultimately setting aside the impugned order and providing relief to the appellant. en-us Thu, 02 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:56:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341626 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the pharmaceutical manufacturer in the appeal, overturning the Order-in-Appeal. It held that duty liability did not arise on samples drawn for in-house testing and analysis within the factory premises, as they were not cleared for home consumption. The manufacturer's discharge of duty based on production costs was deemed sufficient, rejecting the revenue authorities' argument for duty based on MRP minus abatement. Citing a Bombay High Court judgment, the Tribunal emphasized the distinction when goods are consumed or destroyed within the factory during testing, ultimately setting aside the impugned order and providing relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341626