https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51337 Under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, dismantling heavily damaged motor vehicles and using the salvaged parts with fresh parts to assemble a different vehicle was treated as manufacture, not repair. The process was not a mere restoration of the same vehicle to working condition; it produced a new marketable article, so duty applied and Rule 173H relief was unavailable. On penalty, the record showed prior intimation and disclosure in returns, and absence of suppression, so penalty was not justified and was deleted. The duty position was to be recomputed after credit for admissible reversals and captively consumed components. en-us Mon, 12 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 11:44:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51337 Under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, dismantling heavily damaged motor vehicles and using the salvaged parts with fresh parts to assemble a different vehicle was treated as manufacture, not repair. The process was not a mere restoration of the same vehicle to working condition; it produced a new marketable article, so duty applied and Rule 173H relief was unavailable. On penalty, the record showed prior intimation and disclosure in returns, and absence of suppression, so penalty was not justified and was deleted. The duty position was to be recomputed after credit for admissible reversals and captively consumed components. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51337