https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115096 Common Central Excise registration was considered for two manufacturing units of the same manufacturer separated by a railway line. The units were treated as one integrated manufacturing operation because molasses moved directly from the sugar unit to the distillery for further manufacture. The relevant notification permitting single registration for premises separated by a public road, railway line or canal, subject to proper accountal and conditions, was applied, while the contrary notification on separate registration was not treated as controlling on these facts. Prior Tribunal decisions supporting common registration despite physical separation were followed. The refusal of a single registration for both units was held unjustified. en-us Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 May 2012 17:13:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115096 Common Central Excise registration was considered for two manufacturing units of the same manufacturer separated by a railway line. The units were treated as one integrated manufacturing operation because molasses moved directly from the sugar unit to the distillery for further manufacture. The relevant notification permitting single registration for premises separated by a public road, railway line or canal, subject to proper accountal and conditions, was applied, while the contrary notification on separate registration was not treated as controlling on these facts. Prior Tribunal decisions supporting common registration despite physical separation were followed. The refusal of a single registration for both units was held unjustified. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115096