https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83567 P.P. medicines cleared under another concern's brand name were not entitled to separate small-scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. unless the alleged loan licencee was proved to be the manufacturer using its own raw material, labour and supervision in hired or leased premises. The commentary accepts that a genuine loan licencee can be treated as an independent manufacturer, and that para 7 of the notification does not apply in such cases. On the facts, however, the record showed only job work by the appellants and receipt of rent, with no reliable proof of independent manufacture by Morgendew Laboratories. The clearances were therefore treated as the appellants' own clearances and the demand was sustained. en-us Tue, 30 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:34:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83567 P.P. medicines cleared under another concern's brand name were not entitled to separate small-scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. unless the alleged loan licencee was proved to be the manufacturer using its own raw material, labour and supervision in hired or leased premises. The commentary accepts that a genuine loan licencee can be treated as an independent manufacturer, and that para 7 of the notification does not apply in such cases. On the facts, however, the record showed only job work by the appellants and receipt of rent, with no reliable proof of independent manufacture by Morgendew Laboratories. The clearances were therefore treated as the appellants' own clearances and the demand was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83567