https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209213 Where a plant and equipment are leased for consideration and operated on a principal-to-principal basis, the party actually manufacturing the goods remains the manufacturer for excise purposes. Mere supply of equipment, personnel, or maintenance support does not make the other party the manufacturer under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In the absence of evidence of financial flowback or non-arm's length dealings, duty cannot be demanded on the other party's resale price. The department's assumption that that party was the manufacturer was held to have no legal basis, and the appeal was rejected. en-us Wed, 09 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209213 Where a plant and equipment are leased for consideration and operated on a principal-to-principal basis, the party actually manufacturing the goods remains the manufacturer for excise purposes. Mere supply of equipment, personnel, or maintenance support does not make the other party the manufacturer under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In the absence of evidence of financial flowback or non-arm's length dealings, duty cannot be demanded on the other party's resale price. The department's assumption that that party was the manufacturer was held to have no legal basis, and the appeal was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209213