9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal has been filed by the manufacturer who are a subsidiary company of the buyer company of excisable products who are buying 100% of the goods manufactured by the subsidiary. The buyer company is holding 60% of the shares of the subsidiary. The remaining 40% holding is by a foreign investment company and others. 2. The appellants have submitted that there is no finding about the mutuali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay High Court in the case of Rally Wolf Ltd. v. U.O.I. [1992 (59) E.L.T. 220-Bom.], which in turn was relied upon the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Samtel Electron Devices Ltd. v. C.C.E., Meerut [2000 (118) E.L.T. 262 (Tri.-LB)] and also relied on the decision in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad v. Kersons Manufacturing Co. India Ltd. [1998 (100) E. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng made to 60% stake holder of the assessee company; in the absence of the mutuality of the interest of the assessee company being proved in the business of the holding company. In this view of the case law, with which we are bound and respectfully follow, we would find merits in the appellants case and cannot uphold the orders of the lower authorities. 5. In view of our findings, the orders of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
