https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352062 Separate notices and separate duty demands issued to distinct companies did not support clubbing of clearances on a dummy-unit theory, because the record did not establish which entity was the real manufacturer and which was a dummy. The principle that distinct limited companies are separate legal entities applied, so common management alone was insufficient to ignore their separate existence. As the duty demand itself failed, the related penalties also could not survive. The impugned order was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Dec 2017 12:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352062 Separate notices and separate duty demands issued to distinct companies did not support clubbing of clearances on a dummy-unit theory, because the record did not establish which entity was the real manufacturer and which was a dummy. The principle that distinct limited companies are separate legal entities applied, so common management alone was insufficient to ignore their separate existence. As the duty demand itself failed, the related penalties also could not survive. The impugned order was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352062