<?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>2017 (4) TMI 212 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341242</link>
    <description>Small scale exemption may be denied where ostensibly separate units are shown by evidence to function under the substantial control of a principal concern. Here, factual findings on unsecured loans, proximate location, management and marketing control, cylinder procurement, and the pricing gap between purchase and sale of bottled gas supported the view that the units lacked independent business identity. The incorporation papers and denial of mutuality of interest or cash flowback were insufficient without documentary rebuttal of those findings. Earlier proceedings involving the same main concern were treated as relevant to the common factual pattern, and the exemption denial and duty demand were sustained on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 07:04:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=464804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 212 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341242</link>
      <description>Small scale exemption may be denied where ostensibly separate units are shown by evidence to function under the substantial control of a principal concern. Here, factual findings on unsecured loans, proximate location, management and marketing control, cylinder procurement, and the pricing gap between purchase and sale of bottled gas supported the view that the units lacked independent business identity. The incorporation papers and denial of mutuality of interest or cash flowback were insufficient without documentary rebuttal of those findings. Earlier proceedings involving the same main concern were treated as relevant to the common factual pattern, and the exemption denial and duty demand were sustained on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>