https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100585 Transactions found to be at arm's length and in the normal course of business required the declared sale price to be treated as the relevant normal price for valuation. On that basis, comparison with estimated cost of manufacture was not a proper valuation method, and section 4(1)(b) was inapplicable. The remand direction for fresh verification of prices of other sugar factories also travelled beyond the scope of the show cause notice and conflicted with the appellate finding already recorded. The remand was therefore unsustainable, and valuation based on the declared sale price was upheld in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 16 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:47:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100585 Transactions found to be at arm's length and in the normal course of business required the declared sale price to be treated as the relevant normal price for valuation. On that basis, comparison with estimated cost of manufacture was not a proper valuation method, and section 4(1)(b) was inapplicable. The remand direction for fresh verification of prices of other sugar factories also travelled beyond the scope of the show cause notice and conflicted with the appellate finding already recorded. The remand was therefore unsustainable, and valuation based on the declared sale price was upheld in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100585