<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1973 (2) TMI 53 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40627</link>
    <description>Whether printing and lacquering of extruded aluminium tubes constitutes &quot;manufacture&quot; for licence purposes was analysed by applying the definition of manufacture and the ancillary/incidental process concept; because unprinted and unlacquered tubes are marketable and printing/lacquering are not integral to completion of the manufactured product, those processes are independent and do not create a new substance, so they fall outside the definition of manufacture. Consequently the impugned licence requirement and related orders were void as ultra vires and were quashed, with directives preventing enforcement against the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2026 13:18:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (2) TMI 53 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40627</link>
      <description>Whether printing and lacquering of extruded aluminium tubes constitutes &quot;manufacture&quot; for licence purposes was analysed by applying the definition of manufacture and the ancillary/incidental process concept; because unprinted and unlacquered tubes are marketable and printing/lacquering are not integral to completion of the manufactured product, those processes are independent and do not create a new substance, so they fall outside the definition of manufacture. Consequently the impugned licence requirement and related orders were void as ultra vires and were quashed, with directives preventing enforcement against the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40627</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>