https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76999 Duty-paid rejected goods returned under Rule 173H were re-lablled, repacked, re-blended and otherwise reprocessed before resale, but those operations did not create a new product for central excise purposes. Because the goods had already suffered duty on their initial clearance as finished products, a second levy on the same goods was not justified. The Court held that the reprocessing of rejected goods did not amount to manufacture and that no further central excise duty was payable. en-us Tue, 18 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76999 Duty-paid rejected goods returned under Rule 173H were re-lablled, repacked, re-blended and otherwise reprocessed before resale, but those operations did not create a new product for central excise purposes. Because the goods had already suffered duty on their initial clearance as finished products, a second levy on the same goods was not justified. The Court held that the reprocessing of rejected goods did not amount to manufacture and that no further central excise duty was payable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76999