https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92629 Unmachined castings sent to independent job workers did not become finished parts/components at the appellants' factory; the manufacturer was the person who carried out the machining and brought the new excisable product into existence. The appellants were therefore liable only for castings cleared from their own factory, not for finished parts made by job workers. For the period in question, the facts also supported invocation of the extended limitation period because the Department learned of the activity only later. Penalty was not justified on the facts and was set aside, and recomputation was directed where necessary. en-us Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2011 10:25:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92629 Unmachined castings sent to independent job workers did not become finished parts/components at the appellants' factory; the manufacturer was the person who carried out the machining and brought the new excisable product into existence. The appellants were therefore liable only for castings cleared from their own factory, not for finished parts made by job workers. For the period in question, the facts also supported invocation of the extended limitation period because the Department learned of the activity only later. Penalty was not justified on the facts and was set aside, and recomputation was directed where necessary. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92629