https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367619 The court confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 16,418 on the appellant for illegal manufacturing of Deshi Gutkha. The appellant's claim of not owning the premises where the goods were seized was dismissed due to lack of evidence and suspicion over the validity of the rent agreement. Duty liability was upheld regardless of goods being confiscated but not redeemed, as the illegal manufacture at unregistered premises invalidated the appellant's arguments. The appellant's appeal was rejected, and duty payment was enforced based on the findings of illegal manufacturing and lack of evidence supporting the appellant's claims. en-us Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Sep 2018 08:19:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367619 The court confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 16,418 on the appellant for illegal manufacturing of Deshi Gutkha. The appellant's claim of not owning the premises where the goods were seized was dismissed due to lack of evidence and suspicion over the validity of the rent agreement. Duty liability was upheld regardless of goods being confiscated but not redeemed, as the illegal manufacture at unregistered premises invalidated the appellant's arguments. The appellant's appeal was rejected, and duty payment was enforced based on the findings of illegal manufacturing and lack of evidence supporting the appellant's claims. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367619