https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109018 Re-processing of duty-paid bulk drugs returned by the manufacturer did not amount to manufacture for a second central excise levy. The goods were received back under Rule 173H and subjected to milling, blending, sifting, washing, solvent treatment and repacking, but the Tribunal, following Pepsi Foods, treated these steps as re-conditioning of existing goods rather than production of new goods. Although Chapter 29 Note 11 treats labelling, relabelling, repacking and similar treatment to render goods marketable as manufacture, that principle did not justify a fresh levy on repaired or reprocessed returned goods. en-us Wed, 09 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 14:24:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109018 Re-processing of duty-paid bulk drugs returned by the manufacturer did not amount to manufacture for a second central excise levy. The goods were received back under Rule 173H and subjected to milling, blending, sifting, washing, solvent treatment and repacking, but the Tribunal, following Pepsi Foods, treated these steps as re-conditioning of existing goods rather than production of new goods. Although Chapter 29 Note 11 treats labelling, relabelling, repacking and similar treatment to render goods marketable as manufacture, that principle did not justify a fresh levy on repaired or reprocessed returned goods. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109018