https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47378 The High Court dismissed the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, finding it lacked merit as it did not involve any substantial question of law. The court noted the appellant's admission that the goods were manufactured under various brand names belonging to different traders, which was considered conclusive proof against the appellant. The court emphasized that the case revolved around factual issues and not substantial questions of law, necessary for admitting an appeal under Section 35G. Additionally, the court rejected the appellant's argument regarding the effect of Explanation (ix) to the notification, as it was not raised before the Tribunal. en-us Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:57:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47378 The High Court dismissed the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, finding it lacked merit as it did not involve any substantial question of law. The court noted the appellant's admission that the goods were manufactured under various brand names belonging to different traders, which was considered conclusive proof against the appellant. The court emphasized that the case revolved around factual issues and not substantial questions of law, necessary for admitting an appeal under Section 35G. Additionally, the court rejected the appellant's argument regarding the effect of Explanation (ix) to the notification, as it was not raised before the Tribunal. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47378