https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89975 Mere compression, drying and filling of hydrogen gas into cylinders did not amount to manufacture for central excise purposes because the goods received and cleared remained hydrogen gas, with only the mode of delivery changing from pipeline to cylinders. The unrebutted evidence showed the gas was capable of use for hydrogenation, and later departmental literature could not displace that evidence. Tariff Heading 28.04 did not then distinguish compressed hydrogen gas from other hydrogen gas, so no new commercially distinct commodity emerged and no additional duty arose. en-us Mon, 08 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Oct 2011 15:29:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89975 Mere compression, drying and filling of hydrogen gas into cylinders did not amount to manufacture for central excise purposes because the goods received and cleared remained hydrogen gas, with only the mode of delivery changing from pipeline to cylinders. The unrebutted evidence showed the gas was capable of use for hydrogenation, and later departmental literature could not displace that evidence. Tariff Heading 28.04 did not then distinguish compressed hydrogen gas from other hydrogen gas, so no new commercially distinct commodity emerged and no additional duty arose. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89975