https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41970 Inter-twining duty-paid cotton yarn and nylon yarn into weft yarn, using only a small number of twists, did not create a new excisable commodity because the process brought no essential change in identity and the product was not shown to be known in trade or market as a distinct article. The Court held that, on these facts, the process did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, so Tariff Item 18E was not attracted. In the absence of evidence supporting the department's contrary view, the demand and adjudication were unsustainable. en-us Thu, 18 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:02:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41970 Inter-twining duty-paid cotton yarn and nylon yarn into weft yarn, using only a small number of twists, did not create a new excisable commodity because the process brought no essential change in identity and the product was not shown to be known in trade or market as a distinct article. The Court held that, on these facts, the process did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, so Tariff Item 18E was not attracted. In the absence of evidence supporting the department's contrary view, the demand and adjudication were unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 18 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41970