https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390761 Separate manufacture, independent registration and distinct equipment supported the view that two units were genuinely independent for SSI purposes. Common family ownership alone was insufficient to club clearances, and the absence of reliable evidence of mutuality of interest, financial intertwining or flow back of funds meant the legal basis for denying SSI exemption was not made out. The record also showed that the loans mentioned were between individuals and the units and were repaid with interest, while the notice did not even allege that one unit was a dummy of the other. On that basis, clubbing was rejected and the related demand, interest and penalties were set aside. en-us Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jan 2020 06:51:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390761 Separate manufacture, independent registration and distinct equipment supported the view that two units were genuinely independent for SSI purposes. Common family ownership alone was insufficient to club clearances, and the absence of reliable evidence of mutuality of interest, financial intertwining or flow back of funds meant the legal basis for denying SSI exemption was not made out. The record also showed that the loans mentioned were between individuals and the units and were repaid with interest, while the notice did not even allege that one unit was a dummy of the other. On that basis, clubbing was rejected and the related demand, interest and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390761