COMMR CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH Vs. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, whereby the appeal of the assessee was partly accepted and the demand and penalty in respect of Histic tablets and PenG Acylase was quashed. The following question of law has been raised in the appeal:-

(2.) To appreciate this question, it would be pertinent to refer to Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), which at the relevant time read as follows:-

(3.) It is obvious that under clause (i) Chapter 2(f), manufacture will include any process, which is incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product. This would relate to the normally understood dictionary meaning of the word 'manufacture'. Under the normally understood meaning of the word 'manufacture', a new product should come into being for any process to be called a manufacturing process. However sub clause (2) is a deeming provision which empowers the Government to specify in relation to any goods the processes which would amount to manufacture.