https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41810 Twisting copper wires in job-work did not constitute manufacture under Section 2(f) because the process did not create a new, commercially distinct and marketable commodity. The wires remained copper conductors, and the Department failed to show that twisting produced a separate excisable product under Tariff Item No. 33-B. As the activity was only an intermediate step in producing insulated copper wires, duty could not be fastened on the job-worker when the final dutiable product was manufactured and assessed in the hands of the principal manufacturer. The demand was therefore unsustainable, and the assessment and revisional orders were set aside with consequential refund relief. en-us Wed, 05 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:05:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41810 Twisting copper wires in job-work did not constitute manufacture under Section 2(f) because the process did not create a new, commercially distinct and marketable commodity. The wires remained copper conductors, and the Department failed to show that twisting produced a separate excisable product under Tariff Item No. 33-B. As the activity was only an intermediate step in producing insulated copper wires, duty could not be fastened on the job-worker when the final dutiable product was manufactured and assessed in the hands of the principal manufacturer. The demand was therefore unsustainable, and the assessment and revisional orders were set aside with consequential refund relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41810