9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (4) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mined the records of the case. 2. The Advocate Shri J. Banerjee who appeared on behalf of the applicants mainly argued on two issues namely: (i) The question of time bar regarding filing of the appeal against the order-in-original; and (ii) The merit of the case on the question of what constitutes a 'related person' under the new Sec. 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 3. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppear before him the applicants could have explained to him that their appeal was in time and not time barred as held by him. The appellate order is, therefore, not maintainable. 4. Government further observe that on merits the applicants have a case for consideration. The point for decision is whether or not a wholesale buyer becomes a related person simply due to the fact that the buyer is cal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eement and this cannot be treated as 'related person' within the meaning of Sec. 4(4)(c) of the said Act. 5. The Advocate raised another minor question which is whether the sales made to staff and labourers at concessional rates should be treated as a different class of buyers and whether price list submitted for this should be in Part IV or Part V. Government hold that the sales to staff and la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
