https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345292 The appellant, engaged in manufacturing medicines, injections, and eye drops, contested a demand of duty based on income surrendered to the Income Tax department without independent evidence. The appellant argued that the surrendered income belonged to their father or was invested in immovable property, and no investigation verified excess goods production. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that duty can only be demanded on actual manufactured goods and without evidence of excess production, the demand is unjustified. As the Revenue failed to prove excess manufactured goods, the demand was deemed unsustainable, leading to the appeal's success. en-us Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Aug 2017 16:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345292 The appellant, engaged in manufacturing medicines, injections, and eye drops, contested a demand of duty based on income surrendered to the Income Tax department without independent evidence. The appellant argued that the surrendered income belonged to their father or was invested in immovable property, and no investigation verified excess goods production. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that duty can only be demanded on actual manufactured goods and without evidence of excess production, the demand is unjustified. As the Revenue failed to prove excess manufactured goods, the demand was deemed unsustainable, leading to the appeal's success. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345292