https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263320 A de novo adjudicating authority cannot revive a duty demand that had earlier been dropped and was outside the scope of the remand; the confirmation of the dropped demand was therefore unsustainable and set aside. In valuation, a manufacturer and a marketing company are not related persons merely because the entire production is sold through that company, it pays marketing expenses, or provides loans. Absent evidence of mutuality of interest, common control, or all-pervasive financial or managerial domination, principal-to-principal dealings remain intact. The related-person valuation, along with the consequential penalty and interest, was thus not sustainable, and the impugned order was set aside in entirety. en-us Wed, 03 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Feb 2016 12:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263320 A de novo adjudicating authority cannot revive a duty demand that had earlier been dropped and was outside the scope of the remand; the confirmation of the dropped demand was therefore unsustainable and set aside. In valuation, a manufacturer and a marketing company are not related persons merely because the entire production is sold through that company, it pays marketing expenses, or provides loans. Absent evidence of mutuality of interest, common control, or all-pervasive financial or managerial domination, principal-to-principal dealings remain intact. The related-person valuation, along with the consequential penalty and interest, was thus not sustainable, and the impugned order was set aside in entirety. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263320