https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52721 Pasting statutory stickers on imported cosmetics was treated as mere relabelling of goods already imported in fully packed form. The activity, done to comply with labelling requirements under the packaged commodities rules, did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Chapter Note 4 of Chapter 33 of the Tariff. Prior Tribunal decisions had taken the same view, and the department's challenge to that position had already failed before the Apex Court. The resulting duty demand was therefore not sustainable. en-us Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:43:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52721 Pasting statutory stickers on imported cosmetics was treated as mere relabelling of goods already imported in fully packed form. The activity, done to comply with labelling requirements under the packaged commodities rules, did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Chapter Note 4 of Chapter 33 of the Tariff. Prior Tribunal decisions had taken the same view, and the department's challenge to that position had already failed before the Apex Court. The resulting duty demand was therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52721