https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42915 Lacquering and metallising of duty-paid polyester film was examined under the manufacture test in section 2(f). The process was held not to amount to manufacture because it did not bring into existence a new and distinct commercial commodity with a different identity, character or use; mere surface treatment and colour change were insufficient, and the tariff reference to lacquered or metallised film could not by itself establish exigibility to excise duty. The objection based on alternative appellate remedy was also rejected, as the writ had been entertained earlier and interim orders had continued for years, making it inappropriate to decline merits-based review. The excise demand was set aside and refund of duty paid under protest was directed. en-us Fri, 07 Dec 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:22:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42915 Lacquering and metallising of duty-paid polyester film was examined under the manufacture test in section 2(f). The process was held not to amount to manufacture because it did not bring into existence a new and distinct commercial commodity with a different identity, character or use; mere surface treatment and colour change were insufficient, and the tariff reference to lacquered or metallised film could not by itself establish exigibility to excise duty. The objection based on alternative appellate remedy was also rejected, as the writ had been entertained earlier and interim orders had continued for years, making it inappropriate to decline merits-based review. The excise demand was set aside and refund of duty paid under protest was directed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Dec 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42915