Dismissing the appeal the Court held that the assessee manufactured polyurethane foam and supplied it in different sizes and designs to the assembly operator, and it was ultimately used for car seats. The assessee did not undertake any further process for the end product, namely, car seats. The polyurethane foam supplied in different designs and sizes was used as ingredient by others, namely, assembly operators for the car seats. Merely because the assessee used the chemicals and ultimately what was manufactured was polyurethane foam and that was used by assembly operators after the process of moulding as car seats, it could not be said that the end product manufactured by the assessee was car seats or automobile seats. There must be a further process undertaken by the very assessee in manufacture of the car seats. When the article manufactured by the assessee, namely, polyurethane foam, was an article classifiable in the Eleventh Schedule (entry 25), considering section 80-IB(2)(iii).  The  assessee is not entitle to deduction.(AY.2003-04)