https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89771 Cutting iron and steel angles to size and drilling holes did not amount to manufacture because the processed goods did not emerge with a new name, character or use. In this classification dispute, the Revenue had to prove by evidence that the goods were recognised in the market as a distinct commodity and as structurals under tariff sub-heading 7308.90, but no such evidence was produced. On the material available, the articles remained drilled iron and steel angles, and they were not established as structurals. The appeal therefore succeeded in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 30 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:56:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89771 Cutting iron and steel angles to size and drilling holes did not amount to manufacture because the processed goods did not emerge with a new name, character or use. In this classification dispute, the Revenue had to prove by evidence that the goods were recognised in the market as a distinct commodity and as structurals under tariff sub-heading 7308.90, but no such evidence was produced. On the material available, the articles remained drilled iron and steel angles, and they were not established as structurals. The appeal therefore succeeded in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89771