https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105965 Putting duty-paid inked ribbons into spools, cassettes or cartridges did not amount to manufacture because the ribbons underwent no physical or chemical change and retained the same character, identity and end use. Applying the settled test for manufacture, no new and distinct commercial commodity came into existence, so the process fell outside section 2(f) of the central excise law. The tariff phrase "whether or not" was treated as covering ribbons supplied on spools or in cartridges as excisable goods, but not as creating a separate act of manufacture. The resulting goods were therefore not liable to central excise duty. en-us Thu, 02 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:36:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105965 Putting duty-paid inked ribbons into spools, cassettes or cartridges did not amount to manufacture because the ribbons underwent no physical or chemical change and retained the same character, identity and end use. Applying the settled test for manufacture, no new and distinct commercial commodity came into existence, so the process fell outside section 2(f) of the central excise law. The tariff phrase "whether or not" was treated as covering ribbons supplied on spools or in cartridges as excisable goods, but not as creating a separate act of manufacture. The resulting goods were therefore not liable to central excise duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105965