9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Cosme Farma Laboratories Ltd. [2015 (4) TMI 355 - SUPREME COURT], where it was held that Though the drugs/medicaments might not have been manufactured by the one who is a licensee and the actual manufacturer is guilty of manufacturing substandard drugs, the licensee becomes responsible and liable under the provisions in the said Act. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/7 & 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... At the same time, the department has considered the appellant FDC Ltd is the manufacturer and liable to pay excise duty. Being aggrieved, both the appellants have filed the present appeals. 3. With this background, we heard Shri SS Gupta and Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, the learned representatives of the parties. 4. After hearing both parties and on perusal of the record, we find that the issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 has nothing to do with the manufacturing activity or term manufacture under the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Both the Acts referred to hereinabove have been enacted for different purposes. The provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 pertain to manufacture of drugs and quality of the drugs, etc. The manufacturer of the drugs has to se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions in the said Act. 5. By following the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court, we are of the view that the job-worker M/s Navketan Pharma Pvt. Ltd. is the manufacturer who has already paid the excise duty. So, they are entitled to claim CENVAT credit. Hence, we set aside the impugned order and allow both the appeals. 6. In the result, both the appeals are allowed. (Dictat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
