Re-engraving of used printing cylinders is not manufacture unless it creates a new commercially distinct product.

Re-engraving or re-processing of used gravure printing cylinders and rollers was treated as non-manufacture where the work did not create a new commercially distinct article. The first conversion of MS blanks into gravure cylinders was accepted as manufacture, but that concession was confined to initial conversion and did not extend to subsequent re-engraving of the same cylinder. Where the process merely redesigns an already existing cylinder for reuse, without emergence of a new product with a separate commercial identity, the manufacture test under the Central Excise Act is not met; the demand, confiscation and penalties were therefore not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether re-engraving or re-processing of used gravure printing cylinders or rollers amounts to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The processing of a blank or worn cylinder was held to bring into existence a commercially different article fit for use in printing, since the engraved cylinder ceased to remain a mere blank or worn cylinder and acquired a distinct commercial identity. The earlier concession that first-time conversion of MS blanks into gravure printing cylinders is manufacture did not extend to re-engraving of the same cylinder for subsequent use. Relying on the view that mere affixing or changing of design on already existing cylinders does not, by itself, create a new product, the Tribunal held that the second and subsequent re-engraving of the rollers did not amount to manufacture.

Conclusion: Re-engraving of used rollers or cylinders did not amount to manufacture and the demand, confiscation and penalties could not be sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Manufacture requires emergence of a new commercially distinct product; mere re-engraving or redesigning of an already existing cylinder for reuse, without creation of a new article, does not satisfy that test.

---