https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108642 Repair and replacement of parts in a damaged switch board, where the duty-paid goods were brought back for reconditioning under Rule 173H, did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The old steel structure was retained and duty had already been paid on the parts actually used in repair, so the process did not create a new switch board despite replacement of all inputs. The activity therefore remained within the scope of repair or similar treatment, and duty was not payable on the entire value of the cleared product. en-us Wed, 25 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:56:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108642 Repair and replacement of parts in a damaged switch board, where the duty-paid goods were brought back for reconditioning under Rule 173H, did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The old steel structure was retained and duty had already been paid on the parts actually used in repair, so the process did not create a new switch board despite replacement of all inputs. The activity therefore remained within the scope of repair or similar treatment, and duty was not payable on the entire value of the cleared product. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108642