https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30327 Processes carried out by a raw material supplier and a job worker did not result in fully manufactured goods at the job worker's premises because the final manufacturing sequence was completed only after de-flashing, hardness and thickness testing, and inspection by the supplier. The Tribunal's factual finding that the job worker performed only part of the processing, while the last steps necessary to make the goods marketable were undertaken by the primary manufacturer, was accepted. Applying the statutory meaning of manufacture and the principle that incidental or ancillary processes form part of manufacture, the Court upheld the Tribunal's treatment of the activity as manufacture under the job-work provisions and found no substantial question of law. en-us Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30327 Processes carried out by a raw material supplier and a job worker did not result in fully manufactured goods at the job worker's premises because the final manufacturing sequence was completed only after de-flashing, hardness and thickness testing, and inspection by the supplier. The Tribunal's factual finding that the job worker performed only part of the processing, while the last steps necessary to make the goods marketable were undertaken by the primary manufacturer, was accepted. Applying the statutory meaning of manufacture and the principle that incidental or ancillary processes form part of manufacture, the Court upheld the Tribunal's treatment of the activity as manufacture under the job-work provisions and found no substantial question of law. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30327