https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333550 Where a partnership firm and a private limited company were shown to have common ownership, common management, shared premises, identical manufacture, and financial flow back, their clearances could be clubbed for excise purposes. On those facts, the corporate veil could be lifted to examine the real nature of the arrangement, and the units were treated as not independently functioning for SSI exemption. Concealment of material facts also supported invocation of the extended period, with duty demand, interest, and penalties upheld. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333550 Where a partnership firm and a private limited company were shown to have common ownership, common management, shared premises, identical manufacture, and financial flow back, their clearances could be clubbed for excise purposes. On those facts, the corporate veil could be lifted to examine the real nature of the arrangement, and the units were treated as not independently functioning for SSI exemption. Concealment of material facts also supported invocation of the extended period, with duty demand, interest, and penalties upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333550