Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1006 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - sister concern was captively consuming the goods - inter-connected units - related person - applicability of Rule 9 or Rule 10 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000? Held that:- There appears to be no dispute that the supplier and recipients are inter-connected undertakings and hence are related in terms of clause (i) of said sub-section and not clauses (ii), (iii) and (iv) - Since the appellants and their sister concerns are related persons in term of clause (i) and not in terms of clause (ii), (iii) or (iv), for the purpose of valuation of goods cleared to sister concern the valuation cannot be done in terms of Rule 9 as the said rule is applicable only in cases where the units are held to be related person in terms of (ii), (iii) or (iv). Hon’ble Supreme Court has in case Commr. Of C. Ex., Aurangabad Versus Goodyear South Asia Tyres Pvt. Ltd [2015 (8) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT], where it was held that Once we come to the conclusion that Rule 8 is not applicable in the case of the respondent, it is Rule 11 only which becomes applicable as that is residuary provision for arriving at the value of any excisable goods which are not determined under any other rule. In view of the specific decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue, the decision of Commissioner (Appeal) cannot be sustained - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|