https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74515 Duty-paid dies brought back for reconditioning were not subject to fresh central excise duty because Rule 173-H allowed their re-entry and removal without duty unless the process amounted to manufacture. Reconditioning or repair did not amount to manufacture where it merely restored the existing identity of the dies and did not bring into existence a commercially distinct article with a different name, character, or use. In the absence of a clear finding that the process created a new commodity, the demand for duty was unsustainable and the appellate order in favour of the assessee was upheld. en-us Fri, 30 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:17:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74515 Duty-paid dies brought back for reconditioning were not subject to fresh central excise duty because Rule 173-H allowed their re-entry and removal without duty unless the process amounted to manufacture. Reconditioning or repair did not amount to manufacture where it merely restored the existing identity of the dies and did not bring into existence a commercially distinct article with a different name, character, or use. In the absence of a clear finding that the process created a new commodity, the demand for duty was unsustainable and the appellate order in favour of the assessee was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74515