https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80490 Clubbed-clearance duty demands require cogent corroborative evidence of common control, intermingling of production, procurement and labour; a single suspicious circumstance is not enough to treat one match unit as a dummy front for another. On the facts recorded, the absence of further investigation, employee statements and supporting material meant differential duty could not be sustained for the whole period. The goods actually seized at inspection remained liable to confiscation, and the penalty was moderated on the facts. en-us Sat, 03 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:28:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80490 Clubbed-clearance duty demands require cogent corroborative evidence of common control, intermingling of production, procurement and labour; a single suspicious circumstance is not enough to treat one match unit as a dummy front for another. On the facts recorded, the absence of further investigation, employee statements and supporting material meant differential duty could not be sustained for the whole period. The goods actually seized at inspection remained liable to confiscation, and the penalty was moderated on the facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 03 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80490