https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41255 A composite, integrated and uninterrupted manufacturing process producing rubberised and conveyor belts did not attract separate excise duty at the intermediate rubberised canvas stage. Item No. 19(1)(b) was read as covering cotton fabrics subjected to processes in the course of manufacture of the end-product, not as permitting repeated levy at each step. Because the supposed intermediary product was not shown to emerge as a distinct, separately marketable commodity, no separate licence requirement or duty demand could be sustained at that stage. An interpretation imposing duty at every manufacturing step was rejected as commercially impracticable and inconsistent with the charging entry. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 May 2010 17:47:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41255 A composite, integrated and uninterrupted manufacturing process producing rubberised and conveyor belts did not attract separate excise duty at the intermediate rubberised canvas stage. Item No. 19(1)(b) was read as covering cotton fabrics subjected to processes in the course of manufacture of the end-product, not as permitting repeated levy at each step. Because the supposed intermediary product was not shown to emerge as a distinct, separately marketable commodity, no separate licence requirement or duty demand could be sustained at that stage. An interpretation imposing duty at every manufacturing step was rejected as commercially impracticable and inconsistent with the charging entry. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41255