9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1937X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . When 100% of the shares are held, interest is paid on the loan or not does not really make a difference for the transaction between the two. Because in any case the holding company would have to bear the entire amount or profit or loss, whatever be the result of the activity of the subsidiary. - decision of the original adjudicating authority is logical and correct and has been rightly upheld. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be clubbed with the respondent herein and hence Revenue is in appeal. 2. We find that the issue as to whether a subsidiary company and holding company should be treated as different for the purpose of SSI benefit or not was considered by this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Cochin v. Modern Food Industries Ltd. reported in 2006 (198) E.L.T. 95 (Tri.-Bang.) = 2008 (9) S.T.R. 329 (Tri. - Bang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y while dropping the show cause notice has made the following observations : (a) The two companies are located at different places and are independent legal entities, (b) M/s. HLPL did not sell any of the goods manufactured by them to the assessee company. (c) The products manufactured by M/s. HLPL and the assessee were different. (d) There were no commercial transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .-Del.) the mere fact of holding shares would not make other company an unit of the other when both of them existed as independent entities. 4. These observations show that the decision of the original adjudicating authority is logical and correct and has been rightly upheld. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is rejected. (Order dictated and pronounced in open Court) - - TaxTMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
