https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773147 CESTAT New Delhi held that appellant's processing of steel wire ropes into "Gripple Hanger System" constituted manufacture, as it created a new product with distinct name, character, and marketability different from raw materials. However, extended limitation period was not justified as Revenue failed to establish intent to evade duty with cogent evidence, relying merely on audit objections. Excise duty demand within normal limitation period was upheld, but demand and penalty for extended period were set aside as time-barred. Appeal allowed in part. en-us Thu, 05 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jun 2025 08:29:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773147 CESTAT New Delhi held that appellant's processing of steel wire ropes into "Gripple Hanger System" constituted manufacture, as it created a new product with distinct name, character, and marketability different from raw materials. However, extended limitation period was not justified as Revenue failed to establish intent to evade duty with cogent evidence, relying merely on audit objections. Excise duty demand within normal limitation period was upheld, but demand and penalty for extended period were set aside as time-barred. Appeal allowed in part. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 05 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773147