Customs credit for shared imports cannot be denied to one unit merely because the bill of entry names another unit.

Credit of additional duty of customs was admissible to both manufacturing units where the imported consignment was received proportionately by each unit, even though the bill of entry was endorsed only in the name of one factory. The Tribunal treated the issue as covered by earlier decisions and held that the endorsement in favour of the Kalol unit did not, by itself, disqualify the Nandesari unit from taking credit. On that basis, denial of credit to the Nandesari unit was unsustainable, and the assessee obtained consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether credit of the additional duty of customs was admissible at both manufacturing units when the consignment was received proportionately by both units though the bill of entry was endorsed in the name of only one unit.

Analysis: The dispute turned on identical facts already covered by earlier Tribunal decisions. The proportionate quantity of the imported goods had in fact been received in both units, and the mere endorsement of the bill of entry in the name of the Kalol factory did not disqualify the Nandesari unit from taking credit. The prior decisions were applied as governing the issue.

Conclusion: Credit was admissible in both factories, and the denial of credit to the Nandesari unit was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the assessee obtained consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are received proportionately by more than one manufacturing unit, credit cannot be denied to a unit merely because the bill of entry was endorsed in the name of another unit.

---