https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263688 Fictitious invoices, lack of proper production and stock records, and evidence of common control supported the conclusion that the units were dummy concerns with no independent existence. The document also notes that M/s. Satyam Technocast was treated as the manufacturer because the recorded statements and surrounding evidence showed actual manufacture and clearance of excisable goods. On common ownership, transfer of business assets and liabilities, and shared infrastructure, the connected units' clearances were clubbed for small scale exemption purposes. The duty demand, interest and penalties were restored after the evidentiary basis accepted by the Commissioner was found sufficient and the Tribunal's contrary view was set aside. en-us Thu, 23 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Oct 2015 15:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263688 Fictitious invoices, lack of proper production and stock records, and evidence of common control supported the conclusion that the units were dummy concerns with no independent existence. The document also notes that M/s. Satyam Technocast was treated as the manufacturer because the recorded statements and surrounding evidence showed actual manufacture and clearance of excisable goods. On common ownership, transfer of business assets and liabilities, and shared infrastructure, the connected units' clearances were clubbed for small scale exemption purposes. The duty demand, interest and penalties were restored after the evidentiary basis accepted by the Commissioner was found sufficient and the Tribunal's contrary view was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263688