Chartered Accountant certification governs plant valuation under the Compounded Levy Scheme; departmental best-judgment reassessment was unsustainable.

The Compounded Levy Scheme valuation under Rule 96ZNB(1) required a declaration certified by a Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant, and later notifications treating Accounting Standard 10 as clarificatory applied to that scheme. In the absence of contrary expert material, the adjudicating authority could not discard the Chartered Accountant's certificate and replace it with a presumptive or best-judgment valuation. The statutory scheme placed reliance on expert certification rather than unilateral departmental reassessment, so the finding that the original value of plant and machinery exceeded the prescribed limit was unsustainable and eligibility under the scheme was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the original value of investment in plant and machinery exceeded the prescribed limit so as to deny eligibility under the Compounded Levy Scheme, and whether the adjudicating authority could reject the Chartered Accountant's certification and determine the valuation on its own.

Analysis: The valuation requirement under Rule 96ZNB(1) contemplated a declaration certified by a Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant. The later notifications and the explanation regarding Accounting Standard 10 were treated as clarificatory and applicable to the scheme. In the absence of any contrary expert opinion, the adjudicating authority could not disregard the Chartered Accountant's certificate and substitute its own estimate based on presumptions or best judgment. The statutory scheme required the valuation to rest on expert certification, not on unilateral departmental reassessment.

Conclusion: The rejection of the Chartered Accountant's valuation was unjustified, and the finding that the original value exceeded three crore rupees could not be sustained. The assessee was entitled to the benefit of the Compounded Levy Scheme.

---