9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Per B. Ravichandran The present appeal is filed by the assessee-Appellants against the Order-in-Original No.52-53/COMMR/CEX/UJN/2017 dated 28.03.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ujjain. The period in dispute is 2010-11 to 2014-15 (till February) & March to October, 2015. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, during the period under consideration, the assessee-Appellants were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -Appellants and Shri R.K. Mishra, learned DR for the Department. 4. Contesting the findings in the impugned order, the learned counsel for the assessee-Appellants submitted that they are aggrieved with the two issues, which were not examined in detail by the original authority; one is with reference to merit of the contention of the Revenue regarding relationship with the buyer. The learned couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndantly clear that when all clearances are made through related persons, then only the question of arriving at the value by cost basis will arise. 5. The learned DR for the Department reiterated the findings of the original authority. 6. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the material available on record, we note that the question in dispute is with reference to correct valuation to be f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the matter requires de novo consideration by the original authority with respect to these two issues in line with the amended provisions of the Valuation Rules. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the original authority is directed to decide both the issues afresh by providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee-Appellants with liberty to file additional evidence, if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
