9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d upon the cost of production - Held that:- The facts are undisputed in this case as medicaments were being manufactured under loan license basis from M/s LHL. It is also undisputed that M/s. LHL's discharge of duty liability was based upon the cost of production. On perusal of the Final Order in assessee's case[2007 (11) TMI 192 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] in the appellants own case the issue involved were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r referred as M/s. LHL) for the manufacture of P P medicaments under loan license basis. The period involved in this case is December 2001 to 7th January 2005. It is the case of the Revenue that the appellant i.e. M/s. GPL is the manufacturer of the medicaments and has to discharge the duty liability on the final products based upon the appellant's sale price from the depot, while it is the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... namely M/s. Niramay Pharma. He would also submit that in yet another case of the assessee, disposed in their favour by Final Order No. A/334 335/2010/EB/C-II dated 09.09.2010 on identical set of facts. 3. The learned DR on the other hand would submit that the judgement of this Tribunal in the appellant's own case was based upon the decision of the Bench in the case of Cosme Remedies Ltd vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jagar Prints Ltd. On perusal of the Final Order No.A/889-890/2007/C-I (EB) dated 28.11.2007 and Order No. A/334 335/2010/EB/C-II dated 09.09.2010 in the appellants own case, we find that the issue involved were identical, except that loan licences were different. Since the issue has already been decided by this Tribunal in favour of the appellants, we do not find any reason to deviate from such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
