New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 447 - SUPREME COURT

2015 (10) TMI 447 - SUPREME COURT - 2015 (324) E.L.T. 3 (SC) - Clubbing of clearances - whether the excisable goods manufactured by the holding company and the subsidiary company have to be clubbed together has not been satisfactorily answered either by the learned Commissioner or by the CESTAT in the impugned judgment - Held that:- Sole basis on which the CESTAT has decided the issue of clubbing is bad in law. Equally, on the issue of suppression of material facts leading to the extended period .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ny case for clubbing of excisable goods manufactured by the holding company and the subsidiary company is or is not made out on facts. Equally, the issue as to whether or not there has been suppression of material facts by both the aforesaid companies is also sent back for a re-determination on facts. - Decided in favour of Revenue. - Civil Appeal No. 5851/2006 - Dated:- 16-9-2015 - Mr. A.k. Sikri and Mr. Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Panda, Sr. Adv., Ms. Shirin Khaju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed Commissioner of Central Excise. These appeals, in turn, arise out of six Show Cause Notices being (1) Notice dated 12.03.2001 covering the period from 01.04.1997 to 31.03.2000, (2) Notice dated 26.06.2001 covering the period from 01.04.2000 to 31.03.2001, (3) Notice dated 07.05.2002 covering the period from 01.07.2001 to 31.03.2002, (4) Notice dated 24.01.2003 covering the period from 01.04.2002 to 30.09.2002, (5) Notice dated 24.01.2003 covering the period from 01.04.2002 to 30.09.2002 and ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y it needs to be clubbed with its holding company, viz., Respondent No. 1. If this is done, it is an admitted position that the terms of Notification No. 7/97 dated 01.03.1997, which exempts Small Scale Units if the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods do not exceed three crores in the preceding financial year, will not apply as the aggregate value of excisable goods produced from both companies together would exceed three crores. Mr. Panda has further argued that the CESTAT has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ll of which showed that Respondent No. 3 was, in fact, a dummy of Respondent No. 1, were only trotted out from the Show Cause Notice itself without any discussion of the detailed reply sent by Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 answering all these grounds to the Show Cause Notice. We are of the view that the issue as to whether the excisable goods manufactured by the holding company and the subsidiary company have to be clubbed together has not been satisfactorily answered either by the learned Commissione .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version