Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether repacking refined edible oil received in tankers into retail containers with branding amounts to manufacture under Chapter Note 4 of Chapter 15 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
Analysis: The activity was found to be receipt of edible oil in tankers followed by packing into smaller containers and labelling. The controlling legal test was whether the process satisfied the deemed manufacture fiction in Chapter Note 4, which treats labelling or relabelling of containers and repacking from bulk to retail packs, or other treatment rendering the product marketable, as manufacture. The Tribunal applied the settled interpretation that the conditions in the chapter note are not to be read disjunctively, and that repacking must be from bulk packs to retail packs for the fiction to operate. Relying on the Supreme Court's construction of the same kind of chapter note language, and on earlier Tribunal decisions, it held that tanker receipt was not bulk packing and the activity did not amount to manufacture.
Conclusion: The activity did not amount to manufacture and the demand, interest, and penalties were not sustainable; the appeals failed.
Final Conclusion: The Tribunal affirmed the order in favour of the assessee and declined to interfere with the relief granted by the first appellate authority.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory fiction for deemed manufacture requires repacking from bulk to retail packs along with labelling or relabelling, the process is not manufacture unless the factual conditions of that fiction are satisfied; receipt in tankers is not, by itself, bulk packing for that purpose.