9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (1) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by Videocon Appliances Limited (VAL for short) and Videocon International Limited (VIL for short), and that both these firms, by virtue of the presence of common directors P.N. Dhoot and N.M. Dhoot and because of the fact that the company was promoted by Dhoot family are related. It proposed the assessable value to be one at which the washing machines were sold by the VAL or VIL. It appears that the Collector in his order did not give specific reason but merely ordered withdrawal of the notices. It is contended in the Department s appeal that he has recorded his reasons in his file. 2. The Departmental Representative reiterates the contention in the appeal and cited judgment of the Supreme Court in Calcutta Cromotype Ltd. v. CCE - 199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the manufacturer and his sole distributor were held by the Sharma family. He therefore held that the assessable value should be at the price at which the distributor sold the goods. When the matter was before the Tribunal, it noted that there were an identify and interest among the two parties involved, but the Assistant Collector did not consider break up of the shares of each member of family of the manufacturer/distributor. It remanded the matter to Assistant Collector to consider this break up and said that if the test of identity is satisfied his order was confirmed. The matter was carried to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court noted that in appropriate cases the corporate veil can be lifted to determine whether there could be r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g machines are fixed by chief executive P.N. Dhoot, is difficult to understand. The chief executive is answerable to the Board of Directors, and the Board of Directors, if the situation warranted can overrule him. The notice did not indicate the details of stock holding pattern in number. On the other hand, statement made before us, the stock holding of the Dhoot family did not exceed 11% in VAL or VIL strongly suggests that they could not have controlling authority in the company. We therefore see insufficient material to confirm relationship. 6. There is another aspect to the matter. We have been shown a copy of the price lists, No. 8883 of 1988 filed by the assessee and approved by the Assistant Collector. In the questionnaire to the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
