https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370558 Separate private limited companies with common directors were not to have their clearances clubbed for excise duty where they were independently incorporated, separately registered, and operated from distinct premises with separate machinery, workforce, accounts and utility connections; common management or fund transfers alone did not establish a dummy unit. Allegations of clandestine removal also failed because the Revenue lacked tangible corroborative evidence and relied on statements from witnesses who were not produced for cross-examination, while evidence supported the trading concern's genuine existence. The result was that the duty, interest and penalties were unsustainable, and the demand was set aside on both issues. en-us Wed, 24 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Nov 2018 07:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370558 Separate private limited companies with common directors were not to have their clearances clubbed for excise duty where they were independently incorporated, separately registered, and operated from distinct premises with separate machinery, workforce, accounts and utility connections; common management or fund transfers alone did not establish a dummy unit. Allegations of clandestine removal also failed because the Revenue lacked tangible corroborative evidence and relied on statements from witnesses who were not produced for cross-examination, while evidence supported the trading concern's genuine existence. The result was that the duty, interest and penalties were unsustainable, and the demand was set aside on both issues. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370558