COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BARODA vs AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES

The Supreme Court held that starch hydrolysate, produced by the respondent, qualifies as 'goods' under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, specifically under Sections 3 and 4, as it is a distinct article capable of being marketed, despite its captive consumption in sorbitol production. The Court emphasized that the definition of 'manufacture' requires a transformation resulting in a new identifiable article. The Tribunal's finding that starch hydrolysate was not marketable was overturned, and the appeal was dismissed, upholding the duty imposed by the adjudicator.