https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40862 The court held that the customization process carried out by the petitioners constitutes 'manufacture' under the Central Excises and Salt Act. As the process is essential to make the brake linings usable in vehicles, the petitioners are required to obtain an L-4 license and pay excise duty. The court dismissed the petitioners' argument that they only customize purchased blanks, ruling in favor of the respondents. The court also clarified that the petitioners are liable for the differential duty after considering the duty already paid on the blanks, rejecting the claim of double taxation. en-us Wed, 02 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 May 2010 13:32:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40862 The court held that the customization process carried out by the petitioners constitutes 'manufacture' under the Central Excises and Salt Act. As the process is essential to make the brake linings usable in vehicles, the petitioners are required to obtain an L-4 license and pay excise duty. The court dismissed the petitioners' argument that they only customize purchased blanks, ruling in favor of the respondents. The court also clarified that the petitioners are liable for the differential duty after considering the duty already paid on the blanks, rejecting the claim of double taxation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40862