2005 (1) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - M/s. Gowtami Steels Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'appellant No. 1') is a manufacture of MS wire out of MS wire rods produced from Visakhapatnam Steel Plant and also SAIL, Bhilai Steel Plant. Both the appellants No. 1 and M/s. Ananda Subbaraya Wire Products (P) L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Rules, 2001/Central Excise Rules, 2002 has been imposed on appellant No. 2. Penalty of Rs. 25,000/- each has been imposed on appellants No. 3 to 7. The appellants have come before the Tribunal strongly challenging the Order-in-Original passed by the adjudicating authority. 2. Shri K.S. Ravishankar, learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, learne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....kept in mind while deciding the appeals. He also argued that even otherwise, the appellant No. l and appellant No. 2 cannot be considered as related persons within the meaning of the Central Excise Act and prayed for dropping the proceedings. 4. The learned SDR reiterated the contentions in the Order-in-Original. 5. We have considered the rival contentions.  Even though whethe....