Ordinary meaning of manufacture preserved textile exemption for job-work bleaching, dyeing and processing of handloom and powerloom goods.

In construing the Textile Committee (Cess) Act, 1963, the expression "manufacture" was treated in its ordinary and common parlance sense because the levy is distinct from excise and the excise meaning could not be imported bodily into the Act. On that approach, bleaching, dyeing and similar job-work processing of textiles already manufactured by handloom or powerloom units did not alter the essential character of the goods or take them outside the proviso. The job worker was regarded as an extended hand of the exempt manufacturers, so the textile remained covered by the exemption and cess was not payable.

---

---

Issues: Whether job work of bleaching, dyeing and processing of textile supplied by handloom or powerloom manufacturers amounted to manufacture attracting cess under Section 5-A of the Textile Committee (Cess) Act, 1963, or whether such activity fell within the proviso exempting textiles manufactured from handloom or powerloom industry.

Analysis: The levy under the Act was held to be distinct from excise, and the meaning of "manufacture" could not be bodily imported from the Central Excise law because the two enactments had different objects and fields. The word "manufacture" in the Act was therefore construed in its ordinary and common parlance sense. On that approach, bleaching, dyeing and similar processing of textile already manufactured by handloom or powerloom units did not change the character of the goods so as to deny the benefit of the proviso. The job worker was treated as an extended hand of the handloom and powerloom manufacturers, and the textile remained covered by the exemption.

Conclusion: The job work undertaken by the petitioner was not liable to cess under Section 5-A, and the benefit of the proviso was available to the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The demand of textile cess and the appellate order confirming it were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal statute does not define "manufacture", the expression must be understood in its ordinary sense, and a process carried out as job work on textiles already manufactured by exempt handloom or powerloom units does not defeat the statutory exemption when the process does not alter the essential character of the textile.

---