https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85818 The appeal challenging the classification of goods under T.I. 68 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff based on electroplating as a manufacturing process was rejected. The court upheld the lower authorities' classification, determining that electroplating is considered incidental to the completion of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, particularly when it enhances the electrical properties of the contacts. The appellants' argument regarding electroplating not being a manufacturing process was dismissed based on the understanding that processes ancillary to manufacturing are integral to the overall production process. en-us Fri, 20 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2011 13:13:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85818 The appeal challenging the classification of goods under T.I. 68 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff based on electroplating as a manufacturing process was rejected. The court upheld the lower authorities' classification, determining that electroplating is considered incidental to the completion of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, particularly when it enhances the electrical properties of the contacts. The appellants' argument regarding electroplating not being a manufacturing process was dismissed based on the understanding that processes ancillary to manufacturing are integral to the overall production process. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85818