1998 (9) TMI 273

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shiv Kumar, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Justice U.L. Bhat, President]. - The common appellant in these appeals has submitted a request for adjournment of the appeals on the ground that their counsel is very busy in another Bench of CEGAT. In one of the appeals, it is stated that their counsel is no longer looking after their affairs and they would like to engage another Counsel. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... DSSL was not undertaking manufacture of wires and cables but, was only engaged in buying and selling the products, that the sale price of DSSL to their wholesalers was higher than the sale price of the appellant to DSSL, that therefore, it must follow that DSSL was acting merely as selling agent of the appellant, that both the concerns were related persons under Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Exc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wo concerns were related persons. The conclusion that DSSL was acting merely as selling agent of the appellant was based on the premise that DSSL was not manufacturing the goods but, was only buying and selling the goods. This could not be a sufficient ground to come to the conclusion of agency. We have perused the copies of the agreement entered into by the appellant. It is true, as indicated by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hire agreement. There is nothing out of the ordinary in this agreement. The show cause notices do not indicate the nature of shareholding in the two concerns or the identity of the persons responsible for running the affairs of the two concerns. The show cause notices do not set up a case that one company had share in another company or that the same set of persons was looking after the affairs of....