TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on - Rule 8 read with Rule 9 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 or not - clearing goods to their alleged sister unit as well as the independent buyers - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the said issue came up before the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RAIGAD [ 2007 (2) TMI 5 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] , wherein it is held that when the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orce of the argument advanced by the Ld. AR. Appeal allowed. - HON BLE MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND HON BLE MR. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Appellant : Ms. Krati Somani, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri. Satyapal, AR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal: The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order confirming the demand of duty along wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that it is admitted fact that the appellants are clearing goods to alleged sister unit as well as the independent buyers. In that circumstances, Rule 9/Rule 8 Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 is not applicable to the facts of this case, therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside. To support this contention, she relied on the decision of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther the Rule 8 read with Rule 9 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000, is applicable to the facts of the case, where the appellants cleared goods to sister unit as well as to independent buyers or not? 7. Although, the Ld. AR is strongly emphasis that they have cleared goods to their sister unit, therefore, the valuation is to done as per Rule 8/ Rule 9 of the Valuation Rules. We also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld that in such case Rule 8/Rule 9 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000, are not applicable and no charge of under valuation is sustainable. In these set of facts, we hold that the charge of under valuation is not sustainable against the appellants as they cleared goods to sister unit as well as to independent buyers at the same price. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
