https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338972 The Tribunal held that the appellant's processes, including cutting, drilling, punching, bending, and welding, did not amount to manufacture, as they did not result in the creation of new identifiable products known to the market. The final products were classified under the Central Excise Tariff but were deemed not excisable. The decision was based on the Supreme Court's rulings affirming similar cases. The appeal was allowed, granting relief to the appellant from Central Excise duty liability. en-us Fri, 30 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338972 The Tribunal held that the appellant's processes, including cutting, drilling, punching, bending, and welding, did not amount to manufacture, as they did not result in the creation of new identifiable products known to the market. The final products were classified under the Central Excise Tariff but were deemed not excisable. The decision was based on the Supreme Court's rulings affirming similar cases. The appeal was allowed, granting relief to the appellant from Central Excise duty liability. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338972