https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451135 Shaping, varnishing and baking of stators was already recognised as manufacture because the stators became fit for use only after those processes; however, the remaining dispute turned on whether those activities continued in-house after 01.05.1992. On the available record, there was no reliable material to show continued manufacture at the assessee's service centre, and the Tribunal's acceptance of outsourcing to job workers was upheld, so duty could not be sustained on the alleged post-01.05.1992 activity. In an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, factual findings were not open to interference absent perversity or a substantial question of law, and the low monetary value under the governing circular provided an additional reason not to entertain the appeals. en-us Tue, 19 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Mar 2024 06:58:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451135 Shaping, varnishing and baking of stators was already recognised as manufacture because the stators became fit for use only after those processes; however, the remaining dispute turned on whether those activities continued in-house after 01.05.1992. On the available record, there was no reliable material to show continued manufacture at the assessee's service centre, and the Tribunal's acceptance of outsourcing to job workers was upheld, so duty could not be sustained on the alleged post-01.05.1992 activity. In an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, factual findings were not open to interference absent perversity or a substantial question of law, and the low monetary value under the governing circular provided an additional reason not to entertain the appeals. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451135