Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2010 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (7) TMI 807 - CESTAT, BANGALORESearch and Seizure - Determination of transaction value - Normal value versus transaction value – Held that:- For all the clearances after 1-7-2000, the value has to be determined based on each transaction. Therefore, the differential duty should be confined only to the evidences available on record - period prior to 1-7-2000, the Commissioner has to decide the normal price for each variety of goods and he can adopt the same for all the clearances. It does not mean that the invoice value has to be accepted. The normal price has to be determined based on the evidence available - matter remanded to the Commissioner Undervaluation - Charge of undervaluation based only on the principle of preponderance of probability - extrapolation – Held that:- In the cases cited extrapolation of a finding in respect of an offending transaction was applied to other transactions in view of the concrete evidence in the case examined - undervaluation of excisable goods is as serious a charge as clandestine removal - Differential duty can be demanded only where undervaluation is established - There could be cases where the facts of one case of undervaluation and the pattern involved are such that extrapolation is safe and justified - facts highlighted by the Commissioner do not justify such a course of action. As undervaluation cannot be ruled out and is likely to have taken place as is apparent from the price lists, chits and IOM seized - case remanded to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication
|