https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85426 The Tribunal concluded that M/s. Arkay did not have a separate existence and was effectively a facade to avail small scale exemption. The clearances of both units were rightly clubbed, and the extended period of limitation was applicable due to the suppression of facts. The appeal was rejected, affirming the adjudicating authority's decision to demand duty and impose penalties on M/s. Step. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Aug 2011 18:43:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85426 The Tribunal concluded that M/s. Arkay did not have a separate existence and was effectively a facade to avail small scale exemption. The clearances of both units were rightly clubbed, and the extended period of limitation was applicable due to the suppression of facts. The appeal was rejected, affirming the adjudicating authority's decision to demand duty and impose penalties on M/s. Step. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85426