Manufacture requires a new and distinct article; recording sound on customer-supplied tapes does not satisfy that test.

Recording sound on blank or spool magnetic tapes supplied by customers on a job-work basis did not amount to manufacture. The decisive test was whether the process brought into existence a new and distinct commodity with a different identity; here, the tapes remained the same articles used for sound recording, and the recorded sound could be erased and replaced. Separate tariff classification of blank and pre-recorded tapes did not, by itself, convert recording activity into manufacture. The process was therefore not dutiable as manufacture under the relevant tariff item.

---

---

Issues: Whether recording sound on blank magnetic cassette tapes or spool magnetic tapes supplied by customers on a job-work basis amounts to manufacture so as to attract excise duty under Tariff Item 59.

Analysis: The decisive test was whether a new and distinct commodity emerged from the process. The recording of sound did not alter the essential character of the tapes, which remained articles used for sound recording. The sound could also be erased and fresh recordings made, showing that the process did not bring into existence a new or different article. The separate classification under Tariff Item 59 covered both blank tapes and pre-recorded tapes, but it did not by itself convert the act of recording sound on duty-paid blank tapes into manufacture.

Conclusion: The process of recording sound on the tapes supplied by customers did not amount to manufacture and was not dutiable on that basis.

Ratio Decidendi: A process amounts to manufacture only if it brings into existence a new and distinct article having a different identity, and mere recording of sound on tapes does not satisfy that test.

---