https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32487 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was held maintainable against the Tribunal's orders because judicial review is not excluded merely by the existence of a tribunal remedy, and the bar applicable to tribunals constituted under Articles 323A or 323B did not apply. On clubbing of three units for central excise, the Court held that separate limited companies remain distinct legal entities unless legally sustainable grounds justify otherwise; the Tribunal's reliance on common finance, machinery, facilities, staff and management, without properly applying the governing principles and section 37B directions, was insufficient. The clubbing finding was set aside and the impugned excise orders were quashed. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32487 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was held maintainable against the Tribunal's orders because judicial review is not excluded merely by the existence of a tribunal remedy, and the bar applicable to tribunals constituted under Articles 323A or 323B did not apply. On clubbing of three units for central excise, the Court held that separate limited companies remain distinct legal entities unless legally sustainable grounds justify otherwise; the Tribunal's reliance on common finance, machinery, facilities, staff and management, without properly applying the governing principles and section 37B directions, was insufficient. The clubbing finding was set aside and the impugned excise orders were quashed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32487