TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2547X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 99. Be that as it may, there is no evidence placed to bring out any mutuality of interest between two concerns to treat them as related persons. Commonness of the directors or even one or two directors being relatives of the director/partner of other concern cannot make the two as related persons unless there is evidence of mutuality of interest of two concerns, or interest of one in the business of the other. There is no categorical statement in the declaration that they are related persons. Moreover, the department has not carried out any investigation to ascertain whether there is mutuality of interest - the demand of duty, interest and penalties are unsustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or sharing of finance between the two concerns. Both are independent concerns and their dealings are on principal to principal basis. One is a proprietorship concern and the other is private limited company separately registered under Sales Tax and Income-tax Act. It is submitted that the department has arrived at a conclusion that they are related persons purely on presumption merely for the reason that the proprietor of one concern and director of other are related persons. It was also submitted that the declaration filed under Rule 173C (3A) of Central Excise Rules, 1994 was filed by the appellants while paying duty under protest and the same cannot be made basis for alleging that they are related persons. 3. Learned DR Shri R.K. Mis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other concern cannot make the two as related persons unless there is evidence of mutuality of interest of two concerns, or interest of one in the business of the other. With regard to the declaration filed under Rule 173C (3A), the submission made on behalf of the appellant is tenable. The declaration has been made while paying duty under protest. Further in the same column 6 of the declaration which pertains to market agencies, the appellant has marked NA (not applicable). There is no categorical statement in the declaration that they are related persons. Moreover, the department has not carried out any investigation to ascertain whether there is mutuality of interest. For the said reasons, we hold that the demand of duty, interest and pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
