https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40129 The SC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's finding that the product was not dutiable. The court held there was substantial evidence-including admissions and lack of Department inquiry-that starch hydrolysate was never marketed and, given its unstable nature, unlikely to be marketable. The Revenue failed to discharge the burden of proving the product was known or sold in the market as glucose or any taxable form; absent such proof, excise liability under the relevant item could not be imposed. The Tribunal's conclusion that the product was not dutiable therefore stood. en-us Thu, 10 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Oct 2025 23:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40129 The SC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's finding that the product was not dutiable. The court held there was substantial evidence-including admissions and lack of Department inquiry-that starch hydrolysate was never marketed and, given its unstable nature, unlikely to be marketable. The Revenue failed to discharge the burden of proving the product was known or sold in the market as glucose or any taxable form; absent such proof, excise liability under the relevant item could not be imposed. The Tribunal's conclusion that the product was not dutiable therefore stood. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40129