TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (9) TMI 192
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is a Department's appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi dated 23-4-1996. 2. Learned Departmental Representative stated that the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of cement based paints and water proofing compounds. It was the Department's contention that they had wrongly availed the credit in question on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s also been inconsistent in her orders and passed this one at variance of her own previous orders. 4. Learned Counsel drew attention towards the cross objection and Order-in-Appeal and submitted that Notification No. 16/94 has a Table annexed to it in which at Sl. No. 10, one of the eligible document shown is endorsed gate passes/subsidiary gate passes/certificates and at Sl. No. 12, there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lied upon the Tribunal's order in the cases of Siyaram Platex and Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (supra) as the respondents' company is a multi-unit company with a manufacturing unit at Gotan, Madras and Bombay and is having the registered office at Bombay. The order for the purchase of the goods was placed by Bombay Head Office for their Bombay factory but, since the requirement of Gotan factory was more u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nit companies, the purchase orders placed on foreign/indigenous suppliers either directly by user factory or through port office of the company and the duty paying documents showing address of other unit of same manufacturer were valid and there was no need for the office of the company to endorse documents in favour of the user factory. 8. In this case also, the GP 1s were in the name of ....