https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85968 For excise purposes, the supplier of cylinders and other raw materials was not treated as the manufacturer of fire extinguishers where the essential processes of filling, fitting, assembly, painting and labelling were carried out by an independent job worker on a principal-to-principal basis. The Revenue accepted that those processes brought into existence a commercially distinct excisable product, but the record showed they were performed by another unit, not by the respondents. In the absence of evidence that the respondents themselves undertook the manufacturing activity, the supplier of materials could not be treated as a second manufacturer for the same goods, and excise liability could not be fastened on them. en-us Tue, 19 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:48:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85968 For excise purposes, the supplier of cylinders and other raw materials was not treated as the manufacturer of fire extinguishers where the essential processes of filling, fitting, assembly, painting and labelling were carried out by an independent job worker on a principal-to-principal basis. The Revenue accepted that those processes brought into existence a commercially distinct excisable product, but the record showed they were performed by another unit, not by the respondents. In the absence of evidence that the respondents themselves undertook the manufacturing activity, the supplier of materials could not be treated as a second manufacturer for the same goods, and excise liability could not be fastened on them. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85968