https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751288 CESTAT New Delhi held that re-packing of herbal and cosmetic products and affixing brand names does not constitute manufacturing activity. The appellant merely received goods from manufacturers and sold them to consumers without value addition. Section 4 of the Excise Act applies only to manufacturers who charge extra for additional activities. Since the appellant was not the manufacturer and the actual manufacturers had discharged their duty liability, no excise duty demand could be sustained. The tribunal distinguished an earlier decision regarding Ayurvedic preparations, finding it inapplicable to the appellant's duty liability under Section 4. Appeal allowed, demand set aside. en-us Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Apr 2024 18:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751288 CESTAT New Delhi held that re-packing of herbal and cosmetic products and affixing brand names does not constitute manufacturing activity. The appellant merely received goods from manufacturers and sold them to consumers without value addition. Section 4 of the Excise Act applies only to manufacturers who charge extra for additional activities. Since the appellant was not the manufacturer and the actual manufacturers had discharged their duty liability, no excise duty demand could be sustained. The tribunal distinguished an earlier decision regarding Ayurvedic preparations, finding it inapplicable to the appellant's duty liability under Section 4. Appeal allowed, demand set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751288