https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46365 The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the twisting and doubling of nylon yarn did not amount to manufacture for excise duty purposes. The court emphasized that for a process to be considered manufacturing, it must result in the creation of a new and distinct article with unique characteristics. Since the twisting and doubling process did not alter the yarn's fundamental attributes, it could not be classified under the excise duty tariff item claimed by the authorities. The court relied on legal precedents and principles to conclude that the duty imposed on the twisted nylon yarn was unjustified, ultimately setting aside the order and allowing the writ petitions. en-us Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:27:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46365 The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the twisting and doubling of nylon yarn did not amount to manufacture for excise duty purposes. The court emphasized that for a process to be considered manufacturing, it must result in the creation of a new and distinct article with unique characteristics. Since the twisting and doubling process did not alter the yarn's fundamental attributes, it could not be classified under the excise duty tariff item claimed by the authorities. The court relied on legal precedents and principles to conclude that the duty imposed on the twisted nylon yarn was unjustified, ultimately setting aside the order and allowing the writ petitions. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46365