https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86506 Duty-paid goods returned under Rule 173H and reconditioned without any process amounting to manufacture do not attract a fresh central excise levy on re-clearance merely because they are later sold at a higher price. The original clearances had already suffered duty, and in the absence of any allegation that the reconditioned goods became a new and distinct commodity or that Rule 173H conditions were breached, demanding differential duty would amount to double taxation. The note states that no differential central excise duty was payable on such reconditioned returned goods and the demand was unsustainable. en-us Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Aug 2011 12:38:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86506 Duty-paid goods returned under Rule 173H and reconditioned without any process amounting to manufacture do not attract a fresh central excise levy on re-clearance merely because they are later sold at a higher price. The original clearances had already suffered duty, and in the absence of any allegation that the reconditioned goods became a new and distinct commodity or that Rule 173H conditions were breached, demanding differential duty would amount to double taxation. The note states that no differential central excise duty was payable on such reconditioned returned goods and the demand was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86506