<?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>2006 (8) TMI 90 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1438</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals against the Order-in-Appeal, which had set aside the clubbing of clearances and imposition of penalties on the grounds of a dummy unit. The Commissioner (Appeals) found both units to be independent entities, with sufficient machinery in the alleged dummy unit for manufacturing goods. Despite the Revenue&#039;s contentions of common management and inadequate machinery in the dummy unit, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s findings, noting the absence of financial flow-back between the units. The appeals were dismissed for lacking merit as they did not challenge specific findings in favor of the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 90 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1438</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals against the Order-in-Appeal, which had set aside the clubbing of clearances and imposition of penalties on the grounds of a dummy unit. The Commissioner (Appeals) found both units to be independent entities, with sufficient machinery in the alleged dummy unit for manufacturing goods. Despite the Revenue&#039;s contentions of common management and inadequate machinery in the dummy unit, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s findings, noting the absence of financial flow-back between the units. The appeals were dismissed for lacking merit as they did not challenge specific findings in favor of the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1438</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>