https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91679 Goods captively consumed were to be valued under Rule 6(b)(i) by reference to comparable goods sold by the same assessee, and minor differences in packing, coating, testing and accessory fitting did not make the goods non-comparable where specification and quality were the same; the valuation basis was upheld in favour of Revenue. The demand was also held to be within the six-month limitation under Section 11A because the relevant date was the due date for filing the RT-12 return and the show cause notice was issued within six months of that date; the plea of time bar failed. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:50:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91679 Goods captively consumed were to be valued under Rule 6(b)(i) by reference to comparable goods sold by the same assessee, and minor differences in packing, coating, testing and accessory fitting did not make the goods non-comparable where specification and quality were the same; the valuation basis was upheld in favour of Revenue. The demand was also held to be within the six-month limitation under Section 11A because the relevant date was the due date for filing the RT-12 return and the show cause notice was issued within six months of that date; the plea of time bar failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91679