9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R.K. Sharma, AR- for the respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order against the charge of under valuation. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Iron & Steel Castings and parts of Motor Vehicle. During the course of the audit it was noticed that the appellant sold 80% to 90% of their entire production ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that this fact on record only 80% to 90% of total their productions were sold by the appellant to their related person. In such case, the provisions of Rule 9 read with Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 are not applicable. It is also further submits that the demand has been confirmed on the basis of average price of the clearance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 are applicable of this case or not? For better appreciation of the Provisions of Rule 10, Rule 9 and Rule 8 are extracted here below: Rule 8: Where the excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used for consumption by him or on his behalf in the production or manufacture or other articles, the value shall be 110% of the cost of produc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0. When the assessee so arranges that the excisable goods are not sold by him exempt to or through an inter-connected undertaking, the value of goods shall be determined in the following manner, namely: (a) If the undertakings are so connected that they are also related in terms of sub-clause (ii) or (iii) or (iv)of clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 4 of the Act or the buyer is a holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
