https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266449 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the processing operations in question, including punching, welding, trimming, drilling, cutting, and galvanizing, did not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal emphasized that these activities did not change the identity of the goods into a new product with distinct characteristics, as required by law. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings related to the refund claim in accordance with the High Court's directions under the Central Excise Act, 1944. en-us Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 May 2016 14:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266449 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the processing operations in question, including punching, welding, trimming, drilling, cutting, and galvanizing, did not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal emphasized that these activities did not change the identity of the goods into a new product with distinct characteristics, as required by law. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings related to the refund claim in accordance with the High Court's directions under the Central Excise Act, 1944. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266449