https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96489 Excise exemption and duty liability on shawls and woollen fabrics depended on proof of a dummy unit, the nature of the goods, and limitation. The Department had to establish common funding and profit flow back to treat M/s. Vipan & Co. as a facade, and mere common personnel was insufficient; the unit was not treated as dummy. Shawls were regarded as fully manufactured goods, so no further duty arose merely because they were later processed, while woollen fabrics were accepted as exempt under the relevant notifications. The extended demand period was also unsupported because sample-based evidence could not justify retrospective duty for earlier clearances. en-us Thu, 16 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:30:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96489 Excise exemption and duty liability on shawls and woollen fabrics depended on proof of a dummy unit, the nature of the goods, and limitation. The Department had to establish common funding and profit flow back to treat M/s. Vipan & Co. as a facade, and mere common personnel was insufficient; the unit was not treated as dummy. Shawls were regarded as fully manufactured goods, so no further duty arose merely because they were later processed, while woollen fabrics were accepted as exempt under the relevant notifications. The extended demand period was also unsupported because sample-based evidence could not justify retrospective duty for earlier clearances. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 16 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96489