9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s Walter AG Germany, which in turn holds 99.9% of shares of M/s WTIPL, the customer of the applicant. Thus going through the adjudication order it is found that the goods cleared by the applicants were further sold by M/s WTIPL at the higher price, thus in view of the share holding as mentioned above the dealing is not at arms length - issue of limitation is question of law and facts and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods to M/s WTIPL on payment of duty on total value of Rs.4,55,67,110/-. The same goods were subsequently sold by M/s WTIPL to their various customers on the value of Rs.6,75,69,435/-. The Revenue is demanding duty of Rs.18,38,795/- at the sale price of the goods by M/s WTIPL on the ground that applicants and M/s WTIPL are related person. 4. The contention of the applicant is that M/s WTIPL is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the higher price. In view of the share holding as mentioned in para 5, prima facie the dealing is not at arms length. On the issue of limitation, we find that the issue of limitation is question of law and facts and the same shall be taken at the time of final hearing. 7. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that applicant has not made out a prima facie case for c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
