TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) passed in pursuance of the Tribunal's Order-in-Appeal E/853/99. In that order, the Tribunal had allowed the appeal of the manufacturer and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals). The question before the Commissioner (Appeals) was whether the inputs on which credit was taken which had been demanded in the notice issued to the appellant had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Ltd. were getting P.P. Medicines manufactured in the factory premises of the appellants out of their own inputs and packing materials. The appellants are also manufacturing the said products of their own. Therefore if the input invoices are not in the name of the appellants or endorsed in their name then there is all possibility of the mis-use of the Modvat Scheme. In this case, the input invoic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urers. The concept of more than one firm using the same facility for manufacture, thus there being more than one manufacturer in the same factory is not uncommon to excise law. The judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Indica Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. v. U.O.I. - 1990 (50) E.L.T. 210 specifically recognises that each loan-licensee would be a manufacturer in one factory. In such a situation therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
