https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97676 Where identical engines sold at the factory gate had an ascertainable normal price, valuation of transfers to another unit for captive use had to follow section 4(1)(a), and recourse to section 4(1)(b) was unwarranted. The Department's reliance on differences between engine variants did not justify replacing the sale price of identical goods with a notional basis. On limitation, regular declarations, departmental awareness of the clearance pattern, and revenue neutrality negatived deliberate suppression or wilful misstatement, so the extended period was unavailable. The demand, penalty, and fine were therefore set aside. en-us Fri, 03 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:25:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97676 Where identical engines sold at the factory gate had an ascertainable normal price, valuation of transfers to another unit for captive use had to follow section 4(1)(a), and recourse to section 4(1)(b) was unwarranted. The Department's reliance on differences between engine variants did not justify replacing the sale price of identical goods with a notional basis. On limitation, regular declarations, departmental awareness of the clearance pattern, and revenue neutrality negatived deliberate suppression or wilful misstatement, so the extended period was unavailable. The demand, penalty, and fine were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97676