Excisability of single and double yarn remains unresolved as the manufacture issue is referred to a Larger Bench.

Whether single yarn and double yarn are distinct excisable goods, and whether doubling or multifolding amounts to manufacture, remained unresolved because the precedent relied upon did not conclusively answer the manufacture question. Notification No. 31/93-C.E. was noted as indicating that double or multifold yarn is manufactured from duty-paid yarn, but the conflict in authority and the wider significance of the issue led to a reference to a Larger Bench. No final determination was made on duty liability or excisability on merits; the dispute was sent for authoritative consideration by the Larger Bench.

---

---

Issues: Whether single yarn and double yarn are distinct excisable goods attracting separate excise duty, and whether manufacture is involved in converting single yarn into double yarn.

Analysis: The order noted the earlier view treating single yarn and double yarn as different excisable goods, but observed that the precedent relied upon did not conclusively decide that doubling or multifolding of yarn is not manufacture. It also referred to Notification No. 31/93-C.E. dated 28-2-1993, which indicated that double or multifold yarn is manufactured out of yarn on which duty has already been paid. In view of the conflict and the need for authoritative determination, the matter was considered fit for examination by a Larger Bench.

Conclusion: No final decision was rendered on the substantive excisability question; the matter was referred for consideration by a Larger Bench.

Final Conclusion: The order does not determine the duty liability on merits and only directs placement of the dispute before a Larger Bench for decision.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the existing precedent does not conclusively resolve the manufacture question and the issue has wider significance, a reference to a Larger Bench is appropriate without deciding the substantive tax liability.

---