9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... person as well as to independent buyers - so the price of the goods sold by the holding company to their dealer was not to be adopted as basis for valuation of the goods sold by the assessee to the holding company – Rule 9 not applicable - E/687/2007 - 1374/2007 - Dated:- 19-11-2007 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) [Order per : P.C. Chacko, Member (J)]. -1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... STS charged on the thermal power station. This proposal, which was made through a show-cause notice, was upheld by the original authority and, accordingly, a demand of differential duty was raised on the assessee, apart from imposing penalty. The original authority also found that excess CENVAT credit of Rs. 896/- had been irregularly availed by the assessee and, on that basis, it imposed another ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions was not to be accepted as basis for determination of assessable value of the goods. They applied Rule 9 of the Valuation Rules and the higher price charged by the buyer from their customer was adopted as basis for the purpose. In the present appeal; it is the case of the appellants that Rule 9 was not applicable to the facts of the case inasmuch as the entire clearance made on the relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne Polymers Ltd ., 2007 (214) E.L.T. 241 (Tri-Mumbai) cited by ld. Counsel, the goods were partly cleared to interconnected units considered as 'related' persons and partly to unrelated buyers, and it was held that Rule 9 was not applicable to the goods sold by the assessee to the related persons. Other decisions cited by ld. Counsel are also in support of the appellants' contention in the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
