<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (2) TMI 713 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116125</link>
    <description>Activities involving repacking imported ready-made garments, affixing brand-related labels and barcodes, and related treatment were examined for possible manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act read with Note 4 of Chapter 62. The analysis stresses that manufacture, as a charging concept, requires strict construction and that an incidental or ancillary process is not enough unless it brings about manufacture in law. Because the record lacked clear findings on the processes carried out, including work done at job workers&#039; premises and the assessee&#039;s own premises, the applicability of the chapter note and the resulting duty liability required fresh determination. The matter was therefore remanded for de novo consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:41:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 713 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116125</link>
      <description>Activities involving repacking imported ready-made garments, affixing brand-related labels and barcodes, and related treatment were examined for possible manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act read with Note 4 of Chapter 62. The analysis stresses that manufacture, as a charging concept, requires strict construction and that an incidental or ancillary process is not enough unless it brings about manufacture in law. Because the record lacked clear findings on the processes carried out, including work done at job workers&#039; premises and the assessee&#039;s own premises, the applicability of the chapter note and the resulting duty liability required fresh determination. The matter was therefore remanded for de novo consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>