https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50678 The Tribunal determined that the appellants were considered the manufacturers of the furniture despite some items being made at the customer's site. It was found that the three units operated as a single entity, sharing common facilities and with evidence of intent to minimize taxes. The extended period for demand was justified due to the appellants' efforts to evade duty. The duty computation was to include materials supplied by another entity and assess the excisability of certain items. The case was remanded for re-computation of duty and further proceedings by the Commissioner. en-us Wed, 04 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:17:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50678 The Tribunal determined that the appellants were considered the manufacturers of the furniture despite some items being made at the customer's site. It was found that the three units operated as a single entity, sharing common facilities and with evidence of intent to minimize taxes. The extended period for demand was justified due to the appellants' efforts to evade duty. The duty computation was to include materials supplied by another entity and assess the excisability of certain items. The case was remanded for re-computation of duty and further proceedings by the Commissioner. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50678