9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Credit Rules, 2004. 2. Show cause notice dated 23.03.2018 was issued by the Revenue and the same was adjudicated by the Principal Commissioner vide impugned order in original which is impugned by this appeal before us. 3. Heard Shri S. Thirumalai, Learned Advocate for the assessee appellant and Shri C. Mallikarjun Reddy, Learned DR for the Revenue. Admittedly, there is no dispute as regards the facts in the appeal are concerned. We have also perused the impugned order and the Final Order of this Bench in the appellant's own case in Final Order No. A/30999-31003/2019 relied upon by the Learned Advocate and the Final Order this Bench in No. A/30883- 30885/2020 in respect of the Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd., wherein it has been observed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Input Service Distributor and has distributed the credit taken in their IPDO to their units. . . . 8. We have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records. Pharmaceutical industry is a specialised industry distinct from other industries. Not only is the manufacturer required to manufacture the correct drug but is also required to make it of the requisite quality and standards. Further, a manufacturer is also required to obtain the necessary clearances and certifications from the authorities before the product can be marketed. Without any of these activities, the product cannot be manufactured and sold. Therefore, for a marketable pharmaceutical product to come into existence, the certifications and quality control ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s used in the R&D unit can be distributed to various manufacturing units. The appellant has just done that. 9. Our view in this regard is consistent with the view taken by the Tribunal Allahabad in the case of Jubiliant Life Sciences Ltd. (supra) and upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court. It is also consistent with the decision of this Bench in the case of Aurobindo Pharma Limited (2019-TIOL-3415- CESTAT HYDERABAD)] and CESTAT Chennai (2018-TIOL-1661-CESTATMAD). 10. In view of the above, we find that the issue is no longer res integra and stands decided in favour of the appellant by various case laws cited above. We, therefore, find that the impugned orders are unsustainable and need to be set aside and we do so. In view of the above clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
