<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1995 (4) TMI 186 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85158</link>
    <description>Notification No. 46/81 applies where goods are manufactured in premises other than a factory as defined in section 2(m) of the Factories Act, 1948. The decisive inquiry is the character of the particular premises on its own facts, not mere common ownership or physical connection with another unit. A separate shed or unit does not lose its independent status unless the manufacturing activity is so interdependent that both places together constitute one factory. On the stated facts, the Sector 2 premises employed fewer than ten workers and remained an independent premises, so the exemption was available and denial on the basis of clubbing the two units was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 10:44:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122225" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (4) TMI 186 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85158</link>
      <description>Notification No. 46/81 applies where goods are manufactured in premises other than a factory as defined in section 2(m) of the Factories Act, 1948. The decisive inquiry is the character of the particular premises on its own facts, not mere common ownership or physical connection with another unit. A separate shed or unit does not lose its independent status unless the manufacturing activity is so interdependent that both places together constitute one factory. On the stated facts, the Sector 2 premises employed fewer than ten workers and remained an independent premises, so the exemption was available and denial on the basis of clubbing the two units was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>