https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388046 The appeal was decided on its merits despite the department's failure to serve notice of hearing to the respondents. The dispute centered on whether the process of slitting and cutting imported tapes into Velcro constituted manufacturing, exempting them from Anti Dumping Duty. The burden of proof was on the investigating authority to establish distinctiveness between the goods. Legal principles were applied to determine the creation of a new product, emphasizing the need for evidence and probabilities to evaluate the manufacturing activity. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the Velcro product to be distinct, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2019 18:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388046 The appeal was decided on its merits despite the department's failure to serve notice of hearing to the respondents. The dispute centered on whether the process of slitting and cutting imported tapes into Velcro constituted manufacturing, exempting them from Anti Dumping Duty. The burden of proof was on the investigating authority to establish distinctiveness between the goods. Legal principles were applied to determine the creation of a new product, emphasizing the need for evidence and probabilities to evaluate the manufacturing activity. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the Velcro product to be distinct, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388046