1998 (6) TMI 194 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

The appeal was filed by the Revenue regarding the excisability of D2 Aminobutanol Hemitartrate in the manufacture of Ethambutal Hydrochloride. The Revenue claimed it was excisable under CET sub-heading 29.42, but the respondents argued the product was not marketable due to its short shelf life and instability. The Tribunal found that the Revenue did not prove the marketability of the product, so the appeal was rejected.