https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795391 Central excise manufacturer status must be established under the statutory definition of manufacture, not merely from representations made to customers to obtain supply orders. The notes state that absence of functional manufacturing infrastructure, machinery and testing facilities, coupled with trading purchases and limited principal-to-principal job work, did not prove that the assessee manufactured the goods. They further state that suspicion cannot replace independent evidence of manufacture. Where the underlying duty demand fails, the notes explain that goods cannot be treated as liable to confiscation and a bona fide authorised representative without knowledge or reason to believe otherwise is not liable to penalty under Rule 26. en-us Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795391 Central excise manufacturer status must be established under the statutory definition of manufacture, not merely from representations made to customers to obtain supply orders. The notes state that absence of functional manufacturing infrastructure, machinery and testing facilities, coupled with trading purchases and limited principal-to-principal job work, did not prove that the assessee manufactured the goods. They further state that suspicion cannot replace independent evidence of manufacture. Where the underlying duty demand fails, the notes explain that goods cannot be treated as liable to confiscation and a bona fide authorised representative without knowledge or reason to believe otherwise is not liable to penalty under Rule 26. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795391