Job work exemption for customer-supplied yarns upheld where twisting caused no new product and notification covered multiple articles.

Twisting and combining customer-supplied yarns without adding any processor-owned material was treated as job work under Notification No. 119/75-C.E., because the goods remained the customer's property, were processed and returned after the work charge only, and the process merely altered their physical form without creating a new product. On that reasoning, duty was not attracted under Tariff Item No. 68. The notification was also read as not limited to a single article; the expression covered more than one article supplied for processing. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the twisting and combination of yarns supplied by the customer, without addition of any material by the processor, amounted only to job work covered by Notification No. 119/75-C.E. or resulted in manufacture of a new product exigible to duty under Tariff Item No. 68; and whether the exemption was confined only to cases where a single article was supplied for job work.

Analysis: The Explanation to the notification contemplated that the article should be handed over by the supplier, processed, returned to the supplier, and charged only for the job work. The materials supplied by the customer remained its property, no material of the processor was added, and the entire quantity was returned after twisting. The process only altered the physical form of the yarns and their identity remained perceptible. On that basis, no new product came into existence so as to attract duty under Tariff Item No. 68. The contention that the notification applied only where one article was supplied was rejected, since the expression used in the notification was not confined to a single article and could include more than one article.

Conclusion: The work done was held to be exempt job work covered by the notification, and the demand of duty was held unsustainable.

---