<?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>2023 (2) TMI 1265 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312405</link>
    <description>CESTAT Chennai held that clubbing of clearances of tin container manufacturing units was unjustified without concrete evidence of mutuality of interest and financial flow between entities. The tribunal found that mere family connections and common management were insufficient to establish dummy units or justify clubbing for SSI exemption denial. The authority failed to properly determine cost of production using accepted accounting practices and could not establish that all manufacturing occurred at the main unit&#039;s premises. The demand for excise duty was set aside due to lack of evidence supporting clubbing of clearances, though penalty on one principal was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2024 19:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743791" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 1265 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312405</link>
      <description>CESTAT Chennai held that clubbing of clearances of tin container manufacturing units was unjustified without concrete evidence of mutuality of interest and financial flow between entities. The tribunal found that mere family connections and common management were insufficient to establish dummy units or justify clubbing for SSI exemption denial. The authority failed to properly determine cost of production using accepted accounting practices and could not establish that all manufacturing occurred at the main unit&#039;s premises. The demand for excise duty was set aside due to lack of evidence supporting clubbing of clearances, though penalty on one principal was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312405</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>