https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73951 A distributor was not treated as a related person because both entities were separate limited companies, no shareholding link existed, and mutuality of interest was not shown; restrictive distributorship clauses alone were insufficient. However, the sale price was not the sole consideration where the agreement required the distributor to incur advertisement, sales promotion, and after-sale service expenses that benefited the manufacturer. That additional consideration had to be valued and added to the assessable value under the excise valuation rules. The assessable value therefore had to be redetermined on that basis. en-us Mon, 07 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jun 2011 16:49:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73951 A distributor was not treated as a related person because both entities were separate limited companies, no shareholding link existed, and mutuality of interest was not shown; restrictive distributorship clauses alone were insufficient. However, the sale price was not the sole consideration where the agreement required the distributor to incur advertisement, sales promotion, and after-sale service expenses that benefited the manufacturer. That additional consideration had to be valued and added to the assessable value under the excise valuation rules. The assessable value therefore had to be redetermined on that basis. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 07 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73951