TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the clearances made by a dissolved partnership firm and a private limited company, operating from the same factory, were required to be clubbed for determining eligibility to concession under Notification No. 80/80-C.E. dated 19-6-1980.
Analysis: The notification turned on the aggregate value of clearances from the same factory by or on behalf of one or more manufacturers during the relevant financial year. The manufacturing activity continued in the same factory premises, and the change in ownership from the partnership firm to the company did not alter the fact that the clearances were from the same factory. On the wording of the notification, the clearances had to be aggregated, and the concession was meant to operate at the factory level rather than by treating each successive owner as a separate source for exemption. Since the combined clearances exceeded the prescribed limit, the benefit of the notification was unavailable.
Conclusion: The clearances were rightly clubbed, and the appellants were not entitled to the exemption under the notification.
Final Conclusion: The duty demand and penalty were sustained, and the appeals failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification links eligibility to the aggregate clearances from a factory, clearances made by successive manufacturers from the same factory must be clubbed for applying the exemption limit.
TaxTMI 
