- (1.) Leave granted in S.L.P.(C) No. 20726/2004.
(2.) A short question which arises in this batch of Civil Appeals is: whether the process undertaken by the appellant (Assessee) resulting in emergence of "intermixture of vitamins" comes under the definition of the word "manufacture" in Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Note 11 to Chapter 29 of the Central Excise Tariff 1997-98 dealing with Organic Chemicals
(3.) To answer the above question, we quote herein-below Section 2(f) of the said 1944 Act, which reads as follows: (f) "manufacture" includes any process - (i) incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product; (ii) which is specified in relation to any goods in the section or Chapter notes of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) as amounting to manufacture; or (iii) which in relation to the goods specified in the Third Schedule, involves packing or repacking of such goods in a unit container or labelling or re-labelling of containers including the declaration or alteration of retail sale price on it or adoption of any other treatment on the goods to render the product marketable to the consumer; And the word "manufacture" shall be construed accordingly and shall include not only a person who employs hired labour in the production or manufacture of excisable goods, but also any person who engages in their production or manufacture on his own account;;