https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388707 The Tribunal upheld the department's decision, ruling that the appellant's repair activities did not qualify as manufacturing, thus denying them the exemption under notification No. 25/99-Cus. Additionally, the appellant's failure to disclose the use of imported parts for repairs justified the demand raised by the department. The appeal was dismissed, and the substantial question of law was decided against the appellant. en-us Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Nov 2019 14:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388707 The Tribunal upheld the department's decision, ruling that the appellant's repair activities did not qualify as manufacturing, thus denying them the exemption under notification No. 25/99-Cus. Additionally, the appellant's failure to disclose the use of imported parts for repairs justified the demand raised by the department. The appeal was dismissed, and the substantial question of law was decided against the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388707