The case involved the determination of assessable value u/s 4 of Central Excise Act and Rule 6 of...

The case involved the determination of assessable value u/s 4 of Central Excise Act and Rule 6 of Valuation Rules. The issue was the inclusion of non-cash benefits as additional consideration. CESTAT held that demand on "Trade Margin" was not sustainable, following a precedent. Another bench set aside adverse inferences, noting the sensitivity of the product and PSU status. The impugned order was found meritless and set aside, allowing the appeal. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X