Processed commercial plywood as a distinct commodity attracted excise duty after resin treatment and wire mesh application.

Processed commercial plywood was held to be a distinct excisable commodity where Phenol Formaldehyde Resin and wire mesh were applied and the product acquired a different commercial identity. The appellant argued that no new product emerged because duty had already been paid on the plywood before processing, but the fact-finding authorities treated value addition, separate use and change in identity as decisive. Earlier refund proceedings and an outdated board advice were found irrelevant to the 1985 tariff regime, and precedent on galvanised iron pipes was distinguished. The appeal was dismissed, with the processed plywood remaining liable to excise duty.

---

---

Issues: Whether processing duty-paid commercial plywood by applying phenol formaldehyde resin, heat and pressure, and wire mesh resulted in manufacture of a new commercially distinct product liable to excise duty.

Analysis: The processing was found to do more than a nominal alteration and to bring about a change in the identity of the plywood, converting it into slip-proof commercial plywood with a separate commercial use. The prior payment of duty on the plywood stage did not prevent levy on the transformed product. The Court accepted the factual finding that the processed article had acquired a distinct market identity and relied on the principle that a process resulting in a different commodity amounts to manufacture.

Conclusion: The processed commercial plywood was a different excisable commodity and was liable to duty.

Ratio Decidendi: Where processing results in emergence of a commercially distinct product with a different identity and use, the process amounts to manufacture and the transformed goods may be subjected to excise duty notwithstanding prior duty on the original goods.

---