https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89520 Each pricelist filed for different assessment periods was treated as a separate event for central excise valuation, because the assessable value under Section 4 depended on its own factual matrix, including contract sales, deductions and market enquiry. Where provisional assessment was adopted under Rule 9(B) read with Rule 173(C), the Tribunal held that one appeal could not cover all pricelists together because each gave rise to a distinct cause of action. Separate appeals were therefore required for the separate pricelists, and the appellant was directed to file additional appeals with COD applications. en-us Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:56:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89520 Each pricelist filed for different assessment periods was treated as a separate event for central excise valuation, because the assessable value under Section 4 depended on its own factual matrix, including contract sales, deductions and market enquiry. Where provisional assessment was adopted under Rule 9(B) read with Rule 173(C), the Tribunal held that one appeal could not cover all pricelists together because each gave rise to a distinct cause of action. Separate appeals were therefore required for the separate pricelists, and the appellant was directed to file additional appeals with COD applications. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89520