TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g authority to decide the controversy as directed - it is a fit case to be sent for de novo adjudication about both the issues viz. of valuation of impugned goods and as to whether those documents prove the relationship between the appellant and M/s. Magnum Steels Ltd. as such so as to invoke Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No. E/50609/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onnected companies and as such the transaction value as per the invoice is not acceptable. The appellants are alleged to be liable to pay the Central Excise duty by taking 110% of the cost of production of the impugned excisable goods in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2004. Resultantly, a show cause notice dated 18th August, 2010 was issued proposing the demand on the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch apparent from the order itself that several opportunities were given to the appellant to appear and provide relevant documents specifically CAS-4 so as to arrive at the valuation but there has been total non-cooperation on the part of the assessee. Specific direction for the same, in case the matter is remanded, is prayed for. 5. After hearing both the parties and perusing the impugned reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... way as it was in the above mentioned matter. 7. We further observe that there has been an apparent non-cooperation on the part of the appellant and till date there is no document on record which may help the adjudicating authority to decide the controversy as directed. Resultantly, we are of the opinion that present is a fit case to be sent for de novo adjudication about both the issues viz. o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
