https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210980 Separate job-work units could not be treated as one continuous manufacturing activity for excise purposes where they had separate machinery, bills, payments, and no common partners, financing, or managerial control; the demand could not be fastened by clubbing their processes. Baling and packing of cotton fabrics did not amount to manufacture because they caused no physical or chemical change and the statutory definition could not be stretched to cover them. The alleged use of power in mercerizing and stentering was not proved by reliable objective evidence, and retracted statements were insufficient without adequate corroboration. On these findings, the demand and penalties were unsustainable. en-us Wed, 28 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210980 Separate job-work units could not be treated as one continuous manufacturing activity for excise purposes where they had separate machinery, bills, payments, and no common partners, financing, or managerial control; the demand could not be fastened by clubbing their processes. Baling and packing of cotton fabrics did not amount to manufacture because they caused no physical or chemical change and the statutory definition could not be stretched to cover them. The alleged use of power in mercerizing and stentering was not proved by reliable objective evidence, and retracted statements were insufficient without adequate corroboration. On these findings, the demand and penalties were unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 28 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210980