https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86492 Handloom cess was not leviable a second time on dyed or processed cloth where cess had already been paid on the grey fabric. The applicable provision levied cess on cloth manufactured after the appointed day, but dyeing did not amount to manufacture because no new product came into existence and the Act contained no provision treating dyeing as a fresh manufacture. The Department also failed to prove that differential duty was payable, so the demand for additional cess on processed fabric was unsustainable. en-us Wed, 11 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Aug 2011 11:44:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86492 Handloom cess was not leviable a second time on dyed or processed cloth where cess had already been paid on the grey fabric. The applicable provision levied cess on cloth manufactured after the appointed day, but dyeing did not amount to manufacture because no new product came into existence and the Act contained no provision treating dyeing as a fresh manufacture. The Department also failed to prove that differential duty was payable, so the demand for additional cess on processed fabric was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 11 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86492