https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41634 Under excise valuation principles, a dealer is treated as a related person only where there is a legally relevant mutuality of business interest; a mere principal-to-principal distributorship does not satisfy that test, so the dealers were not related persons. Where mopeds were sold outright to dealers on principal-to-principal terms, the amounts described as commission were not decisive by label; the commercial arrangement showed a sale-price adjustment linked to wholesale sales, with dealers bearing sales, transit, banking, insurance, service and warranty obligations. Those amounts were therefore trade discount and deductible in arriving at excisable value, and the differential duty demand could not stand. en-us Tue, 26 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2015 17:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41634 Under excise valuation principles, a dealer is treated as a related person only where there is a legally relevant mutuality of business interest; a mere principal-to-principal distributorship does not satisfy that test, so the dealers were not related persons. Where mopeds were sold outright to dealers on principal-to-principal terms, the amounts described as commission were not decisive by label; the commercial arrangement showed a sale-price adjustment linked to wholesale sales, with dealers bearing sales, transit, banking, insurance, service and warranty obligations. Those amounts were therefore trade discount and deductible in arriving at excisable value, and the differential duty demand could not stand. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 26 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41634