9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TED BY : Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - As the issue is common in the stay applications and the same has been adjudicated by a common Order-in-Original, the stay applications are taken up together for disposal. The appellants, in Appeal No. E/25/2004, have prayed for waiver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding to the Department, is a related person. The Commissioner has given detailed findings on both counts and has also found that the appellants have not discharged their burden to show that the price fixed for M/s. Ananda Subbaraya Wire Products (P) Limited at lower rate was on commercial consideration. 3. Learned Advocate Shri Ravi Shankar argued at length and pointed out that there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tionship of father and son being Directors should not have influenced the Commissioner, who has come to the conclusion that they are, related persons. He submits that the appellants have produced enormous evidence, which have also been produced along with the Paper Book, to show that the price on which the goods were sold to M/s. Ananda Subbaraya Wire Products (P) Limited was on commercial conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nanda Subbaraya Wire Products (P) Limited were same as the one sold to the other buyers and it was sold at a lesser price to M/s. Ananda Subbaraya Wire Products (P) Limited. Therefore, the demands are sustainable. 5. On a careful consideration, we notice that there is one point made by the learned Counsel that mere factor of father and son holding separate shares in two different companies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
