https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74506 Drawing wire rods into thinner wire did not amount to manufacture for excise duty where both the input and the finished product remained within the tariff description of "wire". The explanation to Tariff Item 26AA(i-a) treated wire as a cold-drawn product within the specified cross-sectional limit, and the process of reducing gauge did not create a commercially distinct commodity. On that reasoning, no new excisable product emerged merely because the wire became thinner, so additional duty was not attracted and the demand could not be sustained. en-us Wed, 14 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:55:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74506 Drawing wire rods into thinner wire did not amount to manufacture for excise duty where both the input and the finished product remained within the tariff description of "wire". The explanation to Tariff Item 26AA(i-a) treated wire as a cold-drawn product within the specified cross-sectional limit, and the process of reducing gauge did not create a commercially distinct commodity. On that reasoning, no new excisable product emerged merely because the wire became thinner, so additional duty was not attracted and the demand could not be sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74506