https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84119 Clearances of separately licensed manufacturing units owned by the same manufacturer could be clubbed for exemption assessment under Notification No. 175/86, but clubbing did not permit fastening the combined duty liability on one unit alone. Each unit remained required to discharge its own duty liability separately, including by using the Modvat credit available in its own RG 23 Part I/II records, and the duty had to be quantified unit-wise. The demand was unsustainable because it treated one unit as liable for both units' duty. The appellant's contention that duty must be worked out and discharged separately for each unit was accepted, and the order was set aside. en-us Wed, 01 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:03:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84119 Clearances of separately licensed manufacturing units owned by the same manufacturer could be clubbed for exemption assessment under Notification No. 175/86, but clubbing did not permit fastening the combined duty liability on one unit alone. Each unit remained required to discharge its own duty liability separately, including by using the Modvat credit available in its own RG 23 Part I/II records, and the duty had to be quantified unit-wise. The demand was unsustainable because it treated one unit as liable for both units' duty. The appellant's contention that duty must be worked out and discharged separately for each unit was accepted, and the order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 01 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84119