https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46884 The SC examined whether fixing rubber linings on pipes constitutes "manufacture" for excise duty purposes. Based on established precedents, the Court held that the process did not create a new product with distinct name, character, and use. The tariff classification remained uniform for coated and uncoated pipes, and the operations did not fundamentally transform the original goods. Consequently, the Court set aside previous orders and ruled that no excise duty was leviable. en-us Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jun 2025 10:33:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46884 The SC examined whether fixing rubber linings on pipes constitutes "manufacture" for excise duty purposes. Based on established precedents, the Court held that the process did not create a new product with distinct name, character, and use. The tariff classification remained uniform for coated and uncoated pipes, and the operations did not fundamentally transform the original goods. Consequently, the Court set aside previous orders and ruled that no excise duty was leviable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46884