https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83046 Substantial control and financial linkage between a holding company and its subsidiary justified clubbing their clearances for central excise small-scale exemption, so the exemption was unavailable on that basis. The extended limitation period could not be invoked because suppression was not established: the alleged non-disclosure of subsidiary details was unsupported by any legal duty to disclose in the manner claimed, and clearances had been made under approved classification and price lists. The duty objection based on want of quantification did not independently vitiate the demand. Recovery was therefore confined to the normal period of limitation. en-us Wed, 19 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:46:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83046 Substantial control and financial linkage between a holding company and its subsidiary justified clubbing their clearances for central excise small-scale exemption, so the exemption was unavailable on that basis. The extended limitation period could not be invoked because suppression was not established: the alleged non-disclosure of subsidiary details was unsupported by any legal duty to disclose in the manner claimed, and clearances had been made under approved classification and price lists. The duty objection based on want of quantification did not independently vitiate the demand. Recovery was therefore confined to the normal period of limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83046