https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74961 The Tribunal held that the manufacturing process undertaken by the respondents constituted primary manufacture rather than job work under Notification 119/75. The Tribunal emphasized that job work involves processes leading to the completion of the manufactured product without altering its identity, which was not the case with the toothbrush manufacturing. Consequently, the department's appeal was allowed, setting aside the previous order denying duty exemption to the respondents. The Tribunal also directed the department to consider valuation principles from the Ujagar Prints case for future cases. en-us Tue, 08 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:22:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74961 The Tribunal held that the manufacturing process undertaken by the respondents constituted primary manufacture rather than job work under Notification 119/75. The Tribunal emphasized that job work involves processes leading to the completion of the manufactured product without altering its identity, which was not the case with the toothbrush manufacturing. Consequently, the department's appeal was allowed, setting aside the previous order denying duty exemption to the respondents. The Tribunal also directed the department to consider valuation principles from the Ujagar Prints case for future cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 08 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74961