https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208164 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, upholding the impugned order that the assessee and its distributors were not related persons for the purpose of calculating the differential duty. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessable value should be based on the normal price when goods are sold to unrelated buyers, both before and after 1.7.2000. Factors such as shareholding patterns, directorship overlaps, and financial transactions were analyzed to determine the absence of a relationship between the parties. The Tribunal found the impugned order to be in accordance with the law, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. en-us Tue, 08 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 12:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208164 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, upholding the impugned order that the assessee and its distributors were not related persons for the purpose of calculating the differential duty. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessable value should be based on the normal price when goods are sold to unrelated buyers, both before and after 1.7.2000. Factors such as shareholding patterns, directorship overlaps, and financial transactions were analyzed to determine the absence of a relationship between the parties. The Tribunal found the impugned order to be in accordance with the law, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 08 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208164