https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221962 Zinc dross arising during galvanization was held not to be manufactured goods and therefore not excisable, even though it was separately sold and specifically mentioned in the tariff. The Tribunal applied its earlier coordinate bench view and the authorities relied on there, holding that amendments to the tariff and to the definition of excisable goods did not change the legal position. Marketability alone was insufficient where the underlying galvanization process did not amount to manufacture. On that basis, the duty demand was unsustainable and the lower orders were set aside. en-us Thu, 29 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Apr 2013 16:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221962 Zinc dross arising during galvanization was held not to be manufactured goods and therefore not excisable, even though it was separately sold and specifically mentioned in the tariff. The Tribunal applied its earlier coordinate bench view and the authorities relied on there, holding that amendments to the tariff and to the definition of excisable goods did not change the legal position. Marketability alone was insufficient where the underlying galvanization process did not amount to manufacture. On that basis, the duty demand was unsustainable and the lower orders were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 29 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221962