Decorating glazed tiles not 'manufacture' under Central Excise Act. Commissioner's appeal dismissed.

The court upheld the Tribunal's decision that processing glazed tiles into decorated ceramic glazed wall tiles did not amount to 'manufacture' under the Central Excise Act, 1944. It was determined that the process did not result in a new and distinct commercially recognized product, as the tiles retained their basic character even after decoration. The appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs was dismissed, affirming that the activity did not meet the criteria for 'manufacture,' as outlined in previous judgments.

---

---

Issues:
- Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs under Section 35 (L) (b) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 against the judgment of the Tribunal.
- Determination of whether the activities of processing glazed tiles into decorated ceramic glazed wall tiles amount to 'manufacture' under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs against the judgment of the Tribunal, which set aside the Commissioner's order and allowed the appeal filed by the respondent, a company engaged in processing glazed tiles into decorated ceramic glazed wall tiles. The Tribunal concluded that the process did not result in the creation of a new and distinct commodity, relying on a previous judgment regarding the definition of 'manufacture.'

2. The Tribunal considered whether the processing of plain glazed tiles into decorated ceramic glazed wall tiles constituted 'manufacture' under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The respondent argued that their process involved two types: screen printing tiles and decorating glazed tiles with glass fritz. The Tribunal, referencing a previous court ruling, emphasized that for a process to be considered 'manufacture,' it must result in a new commercially recognized product. In this case, the Tribunal found that the glazed tiles retained their identity even after decoration, thus not meeting the criteria for 'manufacture.'

3. The court further elaborated on the concept of 'manufacture,' stating that every change in an article is not necessarily 'manufacture.' To qualify as 'manufacture,' there must be a transformation resulting in a new article with a distinct name, character, or use. In this instance, the decorated glazed ceramic wall tiles did not undergo a significant transformation and remained recognizable as glazed tiles both before and after decoration. The court emphasized that unless a new and distinct commercially recognized article emerges from the process, it does not amount to 'manufacture.'

4. Ultimately, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the decorated glazed ceramic wall tiles did not undergo a change in their basic character and therefore did not qualify as a product of 'manufacture.' The court found no fault in the Tribunal's judgment, citing a previous case that supported the conclusion reached. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs, affirming that the process in question did not result in the creation of a new and distinct commodity.

---