https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74851 Etched aluminium foils already subjected to countervailing duty under Item 27(c) could not be charged again under the same tariff head merely because etching was carried out. The Tribunal treated Item 27(c) as creating a single charging entry for foils and rejected the contention that processing alone generated a fresh levy in the absence of a distinct statutory provision for the processed form. A second duty demand on the same goods under the same head was therefore unauthorised, and the levy on the etched foils was set aside. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jun 2011 14:18:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74851 Etched aluminium foils already subjected to countervailing duty under Item 27(c) could not be charged again under the same tariff head merely because etching was carried out. The Tribunal treated Item 27(c) as creating a single charging entry for foils and rejected the contention that processing alone generated a fresh levy in the absence of a distinct statutory provision for the processed form. A second duty demand on the same goods under the same head was therefore unauthorised, and the levy on the etched foils was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74851