Valuation dispute on comparable sales and Rule 8 led to waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery.

In a valuation dispute, the assessee showed that part of the finished goods was sold to independent buyers, and the records disclosed a prima facie comparable basis for valuation. On that footing, the dispute appeared covered by the Larger Bench view that Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 does not apply where part of the production is cleared to independent buyers. The prima facie case was treated as sufficient to justify protection from immediate recovery, and waiver of predeposit with stay of recovery was granted pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery should be granted in a valuation dispute where the assessee had sold part of the same goods to independent buyers and where the Department invoked valuation under the old and new valuation rules.

Analysis: The assessee asserted that a portion of the finished goods was sold to independent buyers during the relevant period, and the records showed a prima facie basis for treating those sales as comparable. In that view, the matter appeared to be covered by the Larger Bench ruling that Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 would not apply where part of the production is cleared to independent buyers. The existence of such a prima facie case justified protection against immediate recovery during the pendency of the appeal.

Conclusion: Waiver of predeposit of the entire dues was granted and recovery was stayed pending disposal of the appeal.

---