Central excise valuation for sister unit and independent buyer clearances cannot invoke Rule 9 read with Rule 8.

When clearances are made both to a sister unit and to independent buyers, Rule 9 read with Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules is not invocable for alleging undervaluation. The Tribunal followed its own decision in the same assessee's later period and found no infirmity in the Commissioner (Appeals)' order dropping the charge of undervaluation. The valuation demand was therefore held unsustainable and the respondent succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the charge of undervaluation in respect of clearances made to a sister unit as well as to independent buyers justified invocation of Rule 9 read with Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000.

Analysis: The dispute was covered by the Tribunal's decision in the respondent's own case for the subsequent period, where it was held that when clearances are made both to a sister unit and to independent buyers, the valuation provisions under Rule 9 read with Rule 8 are not invocable. Following that binding view, no infirmity was found in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dropping the charge of undervaluation.

Conclusion: The invocation of Rule 9 read with Rule 8 was held to be not sustainable, and the charge of undervaluation was rejected in favour of the respondent.

---