Separate excise registration upheld where physical separation, distinct management, and no suppression supported the bifurcated manufacturing unit.

Separate excise registration for bifurcated manufacturing premises was supported by physical separation, separate management, and later operational segregation, and the record did not show misstatement or suppression to obtain registration. The provisions invoked for a new manufacturer and compliance directions were inapplicable on the facts because manufacturing activity had already existed and no relevant direction was established. The objection that the bifurcated unit lacked capacity to seek registration was rejected in light of the prior course of dealings and the manner in which registration had been granted. The arrangement was not shown to be created solely to obtain exemption, so revocation of registration and penalty were not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the separate registration granted to the bifurcated manufacturing premises was liable to be revoked on the ground of misstatement or suppression, whether the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Rules were contravened, and whether penalty was sustainable.

Analysis: The bifurcation of the premises was found to be supported by the factual position showing physical separation, separate registration, separate management structures, and subsequent operational segregation. The record did not establish that the assessee had misrepresented or suppressed material facts to obtain the separate registration. The provisions invoked in the notice relating to notice by a new manufacturer and compliance directions were held inapplicable on the facts, since the assessee had already been manufacturing the goods and no direction requiring compliance under those provisions had been shown. The objection that the division was not a legal person capable of seeking registration was rejected in view of the past course of dealings and the manner in which registration had earlier been granted. The contention that the new arrangement was created solely to avail exemption was also not accepted, as the separation had been undertaken for business and organisational reasons and had been examined by the authorities before grant of registration.

Conclusion: The revocation of the separate registrations and the imposition of penalty were not justified, and the Revenue's appeals failed.

---