https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52050 Where shaping, varnishing and baking of stators were carried out by job workers, the supplier of raw materials was not the manufacturer for central excise purposes. Contemporaneous records showed that the post-winding operations had been shifted out, and the essential processes making the stators complete and marketable were undertaken at the job workers' premises, so the duty demand on the appellants failed. The penalty under Rule 173Q also could not stand because the duty liability itself collapsed and no sustainable contravention with intent to evade duty was established. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Sep 2010 13:54:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52050 Where shaping, varnishing and baking of stators were carried out by job workers, the supplier of raw materials was not the manufacturer for central excise purposes. Contemporaneous records showed that the post-winding operations had been shifted out, and the essential processes making the stators complete and marketable were undertaken at the job workers' premises, so the duty demand on the appellants failed. The penalty under Rule 173Q also could not stand because the duty liability itself collapsed and no sustainable contravention with intent to evade duty was established. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52050