9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of interest between them - BIL’s employee being a Director of ECCC, BIL advancing funds to its supplier, & ECCC selling its entire production to BIL are not adequate ground to hold that both are related persons – impugned order set aside - E/535/2005 - 1510/2007 - Dated:- 20-12-2007 - S/Shri P. G.Chacko, Member (J) and P. Karthikeyan, Member (T). [Order Per P. Karthikeyan Member (T)]-1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ECCC's products, that ECCC's Technical Director was an employee of BIL, ECCC had advanced amounts to BIL without charging interest and BIL had sold the products of ECCC at much higher prices than their respective purchase prices. Consequently, the value of clearances in the relevant years was reworked with the sale price of BIL as basis when, the aggregate value had exceeded the prescribed amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... price. The impugned order had wrongly vacated the demand. The learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the two entities were limited companies and there was no flowback of funds between the two. The impugned order was in accordance with law. 3. We have carefully studied the records and rival submissions. The demand vacated had been made solely on the basis that ECCC BIL are relat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
