Manufacture determination must precede excise-duty quantification when conversion-kit assembly is challenged as outside the levy.

Excise-duty liability depended on whether assembling LPG/CNG kit components, packing them as automobile conversion kits and selling them constituted manufacture under the Central Excise Act. The notes state that the Tribunal remanded the matters only for duty re-quantification after granting a duty-price benefit, without deciding the foundational challenge to the levy. That approach was considered arbitrary because quantification could not precede determination of liability. The remand order was set aside, and the excise appeals were returned for a fresh decision on the merits of the manufacture issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal could remand the excise appeals solely for re-quantification of duty without deciding the substantively contested question whether assembling and packing components as automobile conversion kits amounted to manufacture.

Analysis: The levy was challenged on the basis that the activity of putting components of LPG/CNG kits together, packing them in a box and selling them as conversion kits did not fall within the definition of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Although the appeals were contested on this foundational question with reliance on precedents, the Appellate Tribunal granted duty-price benefit and remanded only for re-quantification. A remand for quantification without first deciding the challenge to the very levy of duty was arbitrary, since the question of liability was central to the appeals.

Conclusion: The Appellate Tribunal's remand order for re-quantification without adjudicating the challenge to excise-duty liability was set aside, and the appeals were sent back for fresh decision on merits.

---