https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167434 The case involved a dispute over whether hydro-extraction in the processing of man-made fabrics qualified as a manufacturing process for exemption under Notification No. 79/82. The Collector determined that hydro-extraction, involving power usage, was integral to the manufacturing process, denying the exemption. Despite a dissenting opinion questioning the evidence and applicability of certain precedents, the majority upheld the Collector's decision, emphasizing the role of power in hydro-extraction as a crucial factor in determining manufacturing eligibility. The judgment provides a comprehensive analysis of the conflicting interpretations and legal principles surrounding the case. en-us Fri, 03 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:43:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167434 The case involved a dispute over whether hydro-extraction in the processing of man-made fabrics qualified as a manufacturing process for exemption under Notification No. 79/82. The Collector determined that hydro-extraction, involving power usage, was integral to the manufacturing process, denying the exemption. Despite a dissenting opinion questioning the evidence and applicability of certain precedents, the majority upheld the Collector's decision, emphasizing the role of power in hydro-extraction as a crucial factor in determining manufacturing eligibility. The judgment provides a comprehensive analysis of the conflicting interpretations and legal principles surrounding the case. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167434