https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118467 Where medicaments are manufactured at another premises under a loan licence arrangement, the decisive question is who exercised control over production and held out as the manufacturer. On the facts, the loan licence holders were treated as the manufacturers for central excise purposes, not the job workers. Valuation therefore had to follow the excise valuation framework applicable to those clearances, and the buyer's selling price was not the correct basis. The extended-period demand was also held unsustainable on the factual matrix, so the penalties could not survive. The appeals were allowed and the duty demand and penalties were set aside. en-us Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118467 Where medicaments are manufactured at another premises under a loan licence arrangement, the decisive question is who exercised control over production and held out as the manufacturer. On the facts, the loan licence holders were treated as the manufacturers for central excise purposes, not the job workers. Valuation therefore had to follow the excise valuation framework applicable to those clearances, and the buyer's selling price was not the correct basis. The extended-period demand was also held unsustainable on the factual matrix, so the penalties could not survive. The appeals were allowed and the duty demand and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118467