https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43510 The High Court affirmed the decision that masticated rubber is not liable to excise duty under Entry 40.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The court held that masticated rubber, being an intermediary stage in tire manufacturing without independent marketability, does not qualify as goods produced or manufactured in India for excise duty purposes. As masticated rubber lacks commercial viability and market presence, it was deemed exempt from excise duty, and all appeals were dismissed with no costs awarded. en-us Thu, 13 Dec 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:04:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43510 The High Court affirmed the decision that masticated rubber is not liable to excise duty under Entry 40.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The court held that masticated rubber, being an intermediary stage in tire manufacturing without independent marketability, does not qualify as goods produced or manufactured in India for excise duty purposes. As masticated rubber lacks commercial viability and market presence, it was deemed exempt from excise duty, and all appeals were dismissed with no costs awarded. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Dec 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43510