https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246697 Separate manufacturing premises divided by a public road were treated as one factory where the evidence showed integrated production, substantial transfer of yarn between units, common electricity supply, and shared statutory registrations for sales tax, factories, pollution control, ESI and PF. On that basis, common central excise registration was supported, and the captive-clearance exemption for yarn and the related Modvat credit on the fabric division were available as consequences of composite manufacture. The allegation of backdating was unsupported by the record, which showed receipt of the registration application in April 1996 and subsequent grant of registration. The duty, credit and penalty demands therefore could not be sustained. en-us Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246697 Separate manufacturing premises divided by a public road were treated as one factory where the evidence showed integrated production, substantial transfer of yarn between units, common electricity supply, and shared statutory registrations for sales tax, factories, pollution control, ESI and PF. On that basis, common central excise registration was supported, and the captive-clearance exemption for yarn and the related Modvat credit on the fabric division were available as consequences of composite manufacture. The allegation of backdating was unsupported by the record, which showed receipt of the registration application in April 1996 and subsequent grant of registration. The duty, credit and penalty demands therefore could not be sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246697