Dyeing alone makes man-made fabrics excisable under Tariff Item 22(1)(b); multiple processes are not required.

Man-made fabrics subjected only to dyeing were treated as excisable under Tariff Item 22(1)(b) because the tariff language covered fabrics processed by bleaching, dyeing, printing, shrink-proofing, tentering, heat-setting, crease-resistant processing, or any other listed process, as well as any two or more of them. The provision was read disjunctively, so even a single specified process such as dyeing was sufficient to attract excisability. The view that two or more processes were required was rejected, and the assessee's contention failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether man-made fabrics subjected only to the process of dyeing were excisable under Tariff Item 22(1)(b) of the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: Tariff Item 22(1)(b) covered man-made fabrics subjected to bleaching, dyeing, printing, shrink-proofing, tentering, heat-setting, crease resistant processing, or any other process, or any two or more of these processes. The text of the tariff entry made it clear that fabrics subjected to even one of the specified processes, including dyeing, fell within the charge of excisability. The contrary view that two or more processes were necessary was incorrect.

Conclusion: The processed fabrics were excisable under Tariff Item 22(1)(b), and the assessee's contention failed.

---