Exemption under Notification 108/95-C.E. cannot be denied when full supply comes from one unit of the same manufacturer.

Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was applied as operating in favour of the manufacturer, not separately for each production unit. The exemption could not be denied merely because the original certificate contemplated 50% clearance from one unit and 50% from another, where the certificate related to the same manufacturer, no separate certificate was required for different units, and the customer later amended the order to allow full supply from the Silvassa unit. As the entire supply came from one unit of the same manufacturer and satisfied the notification requirements, the exemption remained available.

---

---

Issues: Whether the exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. dated 28-5-1995 could be denied merely because the certificate contemplated 50% clearance from one unit and 50% from another unit, when the entire supply was ultimately made from one unit of the same manufacturer and the customer's order was subsequently amended.

Analysis: The exemption notification was held to operate in favour of the manufacturer and not separately in favour of each unit. The certificate issued by the competent authority related to the same manufacturer, and the notification did not require separate certificates for different units of the same manufacturer. The other unit had not cleared any goods against the certificate, and the customer had amended the order to permit 100% supply from the Silvassa unit. Since the supplies from the Silvassa unit satisfied the requirements of the notification, the fact that the original certificate mentioned two units did not justify denial of the exemption.

Conclusion: The exemption could not be denied on the ground that the entire quantity was supplied from one unit of the same manufacturer, and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the notification.

---