https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96199 Dilution of technical pesticide material with inert carriers, solvents and stabilising agents to obtain a usable formulation was treated as processing that did not create a new product with a distinct character and use, so it was not manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act for the relevant period. The later Budget 1996 chapter-note amendment was characterised as a substantive legislative change rather than a mere clarification, so it operated only prospectively and could not validate duty demand for the earlier disputed period. Prior Tribunal reasoning and the Board circular were relied on to support the pre-amendment position. en-us Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:33:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96199 Dilution of technical pesticide material with inert carriers, solvents and stabilising agents to obtain a usable formulation was treated as processing that did not create a new product with a distinct character and use, so it was not manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act for the relevant period. The later Budget 1996 chapter-note amendment was characterised as a substantive legislative change rather than a mere clarification, so it operated only prospectively and could not validate duty demand for the earlier disputed period. Prior Tribunal reasoning and the Board circular were relied on to support the pre-amendment position. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96199