Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: VAT RATES :: TDS :: cpt :: form 3cd :: VAT Audit :: empanelment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: due date for vat payment
News Headlines »
 CBDT issues second round of Certificates of Appreciation to tax payers for their contribution towards Nation building
 FinMin looks at cut in corporation tax
 Draft Rules for prescribing the method of valuation of fair market value in respect of the trust or the institution-Chapter XII-EB of the Income-tax Act, 1961- reg.
 India is moving towards a flawed GST
 ICAI to organise two-day international conference in Hyderabad
 Here's how to calculate tax payable on your capital gains
 Income Tax calculations for the financial year 2016-17
 CPE Events 17 October - 22 October 2016
 High Court raps I-T Department for wrong tax demand
  CBDT signs 5 advance pricing pacts with Indian taxpayers
 Finance ministry warns tax officials of action against GST protest

When does manufacture take place?
August, 26th 2006
As manufacture is not defined in law, recourse must be taken to various judicial interpretations to understand what it means -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The burden to prove manufacture is always on the Revenue. When an item is covered by a specific entry, the Revenue is not permitted to travel to the residual entry. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 defines the term manufacture inclusively, but does not give its meaning. As the definition of manufacture is not provided so as to interpret what it actually means, one needs to refer to various judicial interpretations of the Supreme Court, High Courts and Tribunals. In Union of India vs Parle Products 1994 (74 ELT 492 SC) it was held that processes could not amount to manufacture unless at the end of it a commercially new and distinct article emerges. In Union of India vs DCM (1977 (l) ELT J199), the Supreme Court observed that manufacture used as a verb means to bring into existence a new substance and does not mean merely to produce some change in a substance. In other words, the produce, which arises out of the process, must be commercially a distinct commodity different from that out of which it is processed. Whether or not something results in manufacture would depend on the facts of the case. The issue of when manufacture of a product takes place within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act is well-settled it is based on both law and fact. The nature and the extent of processes may vary from case to case. When a change takes place and a new and distinct article comes into existence known to the consumers and the commercial community as a product, which can be no longer regarded as the original commodity, such a change constitutes manufacture. In CCE Gujarat vs Pan Pipes Resplendents Ltd (2006 193 ELT 129 SC), it was held that the process for amounting to manufacture must be one which brings into being a new substance known to the market. Manufacture implies a change, but every change is not a manufacture and yet every change in an article is the result of some treatment, labour and manipulation. For manufacture, something more is necessary. There must be transformation and a new article must result, having a distinct name, character or use. In the instant case, it was held that decorated glazed ceramic tiles after their decoration did not result in change in basic character, that is, glazed tiles, and therefore, did not undergo a process of manufacture. In Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad II vs Aldec Corporation (2005 188 ELT 241 SC), it was held that the twin tests contemplated by excise laws for an activity to be a manufacture is that goods must not only be manufactured but they should also be capable of being marketed (as per Section 3 of Central Excise Act, 1944). It also held that, as per Section 2 (f) of the Central Excise Act, whether an article has been manufactured or not depends on whether the article satisfies the test as laid down in relevant chapter heading or sub-heading and is known as such in the commercial community. Whether a process, taken singly or jointly, constitutes `manufacture' on first principles or under Section 2(f) is to be determined having regard to the facts and circumstances. Processes as manufacture The following are some more examples where the apex court interpreted `processes' to be manufacture or otherwise: Goods manufactured are subject to excise duty in India. Two conditions have to be cumulatively satisfied, namely, that the process by which an item is obtained is a process of manufacture and that the item so obtained is commercially marketable and bought and sold in the market or known to be so in the market. Marketability is essentially a question of fact (Hindustan Zinc Ltd vs CCE, Jaipur 2005 181 ELT 170 SC). Laminating/metalising of duty paid film does not amount to manufacture (Metalex (I) Pvt. Ltd vs CCE New Delhi 2004 165 ELT 129 SC). Processes of affixing of rubber lining and flanges on steel pipes and subjected to chemical treatment do not amount to manufacture (Tega India vs CCE 2004 164 ELT 390 SC). Mere repacking of medicines imported for being marketed does not amount to manufacture. Repacking has to be from bulk to retail packs so as to render the product marketable directly to consumer (CCE Mumbai vs Johnson & Johnson Ltd 2006 4 STJ 96 SC). The preparation of transformed structural materials out of MS Rods, MS Channels and mild steel flats by cutting, punching, etc., does not amount to manufacture (CCE vs Executive Engineer, Fabrication Workshop MPSEB 2006 196 ELT A72 SC). In the recent Hindustan Poles Corporation vs CCE Kolkata (2006 5 STT 571 SC) case, the apex court held that an activity of merely joining of three pipes, one with other, of different dimensions to obtain a desired length could by no stretch of imagination be brought within the category of `manufacture' as such process did not change the basic identity or original character of MS welded pipe to make it a new marketable product leading to `manufacture' as defined under Section 2(f). It was also held that the burden to prove manufacture is always on the Revenue, as decided recently by the Supreme Court in Shyam Oil Cake Ltd vs Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur (2005 1 SCC 264). And it is settled law that when one particular item is covered by one specific entry, then the revenue is not permitted to travel to residual entry. Unless the Department can establish that the goods in question can by no conceivable process of reasoning be brought under any of the tariff items, resort cannot be had to the residuary item. The Department's anxiety to invoke the residuary entry was held to be improper. The apex court finally held that in issuance of show-cause notice, the Revenue must carefully consider the settled law which has been crystallised by a series of court judgments. Also, in the endeavour to ensure that all those who have to pay excise duty must do so, the Revenue must refrain from sending show-cause notices indiscriminately without proper application of mind. This is imperative to curbing unnecessary and avoidable litigation. Sanjiv Agarwal (The author is a Jaipur-based chartered accountant.)
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Our Mission

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions