2018 (4) TMI 752

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e in view of the fact that original proceedings are for demand of differential duty. No process of valuation under CAS 4 was followed by the Revenue so that, the correctness can be confirmed by the remand proceedings. The proceedings are for demanding differential duty which, as correctly held in the impugned order are not sustainable for want of legal and factual basis. Accordingly, the impugn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re initiated. The original authority confirmed the differential duty of ₹ 26,05,14 4/-. On appeal by the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand on the ground that if the Revenue had objection s regarding the correct value followed by the respondent, it would have been proper to arrive at correct cost construction data by following the pro visions of section 14A inste .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X