<?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 (11) TMI 706 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350827</link>
    <description>Separate incorporated manufacturing units could not be clubbed for SSI exemption merely because of common family control, common office, common staff, temporary fund transfers or managerial assistance; the decisive test remained whether there was clear mutuality of interest, financial flow-back and functional interdependence. On the facts, each unit had distinct premises, machinery, workers, registrations, bank accounts and product lines, so denial of SSI benefit was unsustainable. The demand also failed because declarations and returns had been filed and the record showed no suppression, misstatement or mala fide intent to justify the extended limitation period. Consequential penalty on the director likewise could not stand in the absence of an independent basis or mens rea.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2017 12:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496002" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 706 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350827</link>
      <description>Separate incorporated manufacturing units could not be clubbed for SSI exemption merely because of common family control, common office, common staff, temporary fund transfers or managerial assistance; the decisive test remained whether there was clear mutuality of interest, financial flow-back and functional interdependence. On the facts, each unit had distinct premises, machinery, workers, registrations, bank accounts and product lines, so denial of SSI benefit was unsustainable. The demand also failed because declarations and returns had been filed and the record showed no suppression, misstatement or mala fide intent to justify the extended limitation period. Consequential penalty on the director likewise could not stand in the absence of an independent basis or mens rea.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>