<?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>2015 (5) TMI 99 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259225</link>
    <description>Clearances of separately incorporated and independently registered units could not be clubbed for denying small scale industries exemption where each unit had separate machinery, manufacturing set-up and no proved financial flowback or dummy structure. Common management, overlapping directors, inter-unit payments and shared marketing were insufficient by themselves to establish mutuality of interest. A charge of clandestine manufacture and removal also required tangible, corroborated evidence such as excess raw material, excess electricity use, unaccounted goods, transport proof and reliable linkage of documents to factory activity. On the facts described, private records and third-party statements without adequate corroboration were insufficient, so the duty demand and consequential penalties failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 99 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259225</link>
      <description>Clearances of separately incorporated and independently registered units could not be clubbed for denying small scale industries exemption where each unit had separate machinery, manufacturing set-up and no proved financial flowback or dummy structure. Common management, overlapping directors, inter-unit payments and shared marketing were insufficient by themselves to establish mutuality of interest. A charge of clandestine manufacture and removal also required tangible, corroborated evidence such as excess raw material, excess electricity use, unaccounted goods, transport proof and reliable linkage of documents to factory activity. On the facts described, private records and third-party statements without adequate corroboration were insufficient, so the duty demand and consequential penalties failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259225</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>