AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 1092
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at the prices on which ultimately sold in the open market to their related person. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of electrical apparatus. They were selling most of the their manufactured goods through Indo Asian Marketing Ltd. (IAML) and investigation was conducted in their factory on 8.11.1991 and after scrutinising all the records it was alleged that transaction between the respondent and IAML were not at arm's length as both of them appeared to be related person within the ambit of Section 4(4) (c) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as they were indulging in evasion of duty by following modus operandi. To allege both of them are related person, the following is alleged as un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....respect of the issue whether the goods were cleared to related person was not decided by the Tribunal. As the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority with liberty to the party to raise all the connected pleas during the re-hearing, the adjudicating authority was duty bound to go into the issue afresh in respect of related person. As the adjudicating authority had not gone into this issue, therefore, we find that it is a fit case for re-consideration. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide on merit in respect of the issue involved in the proceedings. Appeals are disposed of by way of remand."" In remand proceeding, the id. Commissioner examined the issue of related pers....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (ii) both are manufacturing automobile oils with the same brand name "MOTOROL" using similar printed stationery for clearance of goods with only difference in name of the company; (iii) the brand name is unregistered brand name owned by M/s. Motorol Lubricants (P) Ltd., a marketing agency of M/s. Motorol Technologies Ltd. and the assessee company; (iv) both are group companies of 'Motorol' Group and the persons employed by one company are also looking after the work of other company, for example Shri V.K. Vota, Vice-President (Operation) of the assessee company is also looking after the production activity of M/s. Motorol Technologies Ltd., Halol with no officia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd. on loan basis for repacking into smaller packs which have been cleared on payment of duty to M/s. Motorol Lubricants (P) Ltd. for trading; the assessee company M/s. Motorol Technologies Ltd. and M/s. Motorol Lubricants (P) Ltd. are related companies floated with mention to evade duty. All these companies are having same premises for their registered corporate office at Motorl House, R.C. Dutt Road, Vadodara - 397007 with the same telephone, fax numbers, website www.motorolgroup.com and E.mail address "[email protected]." After examining the issue in that case, the Tribunal observed as under : "8. From the above, we find that the two most important aspects which are required to be considered and answered in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not normal. Therefore, we find that the evidence relied upon by the lower authorities are not conclusive enough to come to the conclusion that the MSO and MTL are related persons. 9. In any case, we find strong force in the arguments advanced by the learned Advocate and an alternative submission that the extended period could not have been invoked. In the light of several decisions of the Tribunal and the courts holding that there should be mutuality of interest and merely because there are common directors, common employees, same premises etc. two companies do not become related to each other, intention to evade duty and suppression of facts is to be clearly established by the Revenue. We find that the evidences referred to ....