https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258473 Under the Central Excise Act, manufacture was attributed to the job workers who actually carried out production with their own labour and machinery; the respondent's supply of raw materials, packing materials, and quality control under the Drugs and Cosmetics regime did not make it the manufacturer. The agreement was treated as a principal-to-principal arrangement, and the finding that the job workers were manufacturers was upheld as a factual determination. Because duty had to be assessed at the manufacturing stage, the assessable value was to be computed on a cost-construction basis, including material cost, labour charges, and job workers' profit, rather than on the respondent's later market sale price. en-us Tue, 07 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Apr 2018 14:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258473 Under the Central Excise Act, manufacture was attributed to the job workers who actually carried out production with their own labour and machinery; the respondent's supply of raw materials, packing materials, and quality control under the Drugs and Cosmetics regime did not make it the manufacturer. The agreement was treated as a principal-to-principal arrangement, and the finding that the job workers were manufacturers was upheld as a factual determination. Because duty had to be assessed at the manufacturing stage, the assessable value was to be computed on a cost-construction basis, including material cost, labour charges, and job workers' profit, rather than on the respondent's later market sale price. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258473