https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414334 Relabelling, repacking and upward revision of MRP on imported goods were treated as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Chapter 33 Note 5 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant's admission, supported by unrebutted warehouse statements, was sufficient to show that the goods had lost their original imported character. Absence of central excise registration and failure to produce reliable proof linking CVD payment to the seized goods further weakened the challenge. The redemption fine imposed in lieu of confiscation was therefore upheld, and the appeal failed. en-us Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Nov 2021 09:30:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414334 Relabelling, repacking and upward revision of MRP on imported goods were treated as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Chapter 33 Note 5 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant's admission, supported by unrebutted warehouse statements, was sufficient to show that the goods had lost their original imported character. Absence of central excise registration and failure to produce reliable proof linking CVD payment to the seized goods further weakened the challenge. The redemption fine imposed in lieu of confiscation was therefore upheld, and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414334