Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (10) TMI 271 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (10) TMI 271 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Valuation - Clearance to inter-connected undertakings - CTD bars - TMT bars - wire rod - demand of differential duty - rejection of transaction value for excise purposes - Held that: - merely because the units are interconnected undertakings the same would not be a ground to reject the transaction value unless the units are related persons. - The goods cleared by the appellants to the interconnected undertakings are to be assessed on transaction v .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8 - Final Order No.53362/2016 - Dated:- 30-8-2016 - Mr. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President and Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Sh. Krishna Mohan Menon with Sh. Bhisma Ahluwalia, Advocates for the appellant. Sh. Yogesh Agarwal, AR for the Respondent ORDER The appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 27.03.2008 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of CTD bars, TMT bars, wire rod liable to Central Excise duty. They are selling thes .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

with we take note that for the period July, 2000 to October, 2006 the said issue was agitated through various demand notices. The demands were dropped either in original or in first appellate proceedings. However, for the impugned period the original authority chose not to follow the consistent stand taken by the Revenue regarding valuation of the impugned goods. The original authority distinguished from the earlier decision on the ground that in one case of sales to non related person the price .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t, 1944. But merely because two undertakings are interconnected transaction value cannot be rejected. In Kirloskar Ferrous Industries vs. CCE - 2006-TIOL-1891-CESTAT-Bang. the Tribunal referred to the Board s Circular dated 30.06.2000 and held that merely because the units are interconnected undertakings the same would not be a ground to reject the transaction value unless the units are related persons. We find that in the earlier orders on the same set of facts, the very same adjudicating autho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version