https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89004 Glass jars manufactured by a process involving initial mouth blowing followed by compressed air in a second mould were held not to fall within Notification No. 52/86-C.E. for glassware produced by the mouth blown or fully manual process with tank furnaces. The same goods were treated as covered by Notification No. 67/88-C.E. because the decisive feature was use of compressed air in a semi-automatic manufacturing process; the stage at which the air was applied did not alter that character. The exemption classification therefore turned on the presence of compressed air in production, rather than on whether it was used at the first or second mould. en-us Thu, 19 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Sep 2011 17:43:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89004 Glass jars manufactured by a process involving initial mouth blowing followed by compressed air in a second mould were held not to fall within Notification No. 52/86-C.E. for glassware produced by the mouth blown or fully manual process with tank furnaces. The same goods were treated as covered by Notification No. 67/88-C.E. because the decisive feature was use of compressed air in a semi-automatic manufacturing process; the stage at which the air was applied did not alter that character. The exemption classification therefore turned on the presence of compressed air in production, rather than on whether it was used at the first or second mould. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89004