https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83095 Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was tied to the manufacturer and the conditions in clause 4 and its provisos. A partnership firm and a successor company were separate legal entities, and an excise licence was personal to the licensee; on transfer of business, a fresh licence was required under Rule 178(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Because the partnership was dissolved, its privileges and exemption benefit lapsed, and the company could not claim continuity merely by taking over the factory, assets and liabilities. The earlier exemption was therefore not available to the company. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 14:43:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83095 Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was tied to the manufacturer and the conditions in clause 4 and its provisos. A partnership firm and a successor company were separate legal entities, and an excise licence was personal to the licensee; on transfer of business, a fresh licence was required under Rule 178(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Because the partnership was dissolved, its privileges and exemption benefit lapsed, and the company could not claim continuity merely by taking over the factory, assets and liabilities. The earlier exemption was therefore not available to the company. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 04 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83095