https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107891 Valuation of captively consumed stampings and laminations under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 required reasonable adjustment based on relevant factors and proper comparison with comparable goods. The article notes that the remand directions called for disclosure of the material relied upon and a fresh hearing, but no such material was disclosed; instead, the authorities adopted the highest purchase price of one supplier across all varieties despite differences in ratings and characteristics. That uniform method ignored variety-wise comparison and lacked a proper evidentiary basis, rendering the valuation arbitrary and the demand unsustainable. en-us Thu, 07 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:41:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107891 Valuation of captively consumed stampings and laminations under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 required reasonable adjustment based on relevant factors and proper comparison with comparable goods. The article notes that the remand directions called for disclosure of the material relied upon and a fresh hearing, but no such material was disclosed; instead, the authorities adopted the highest purchase price of one supplier across all varieties despite differences in ratings and characteristics. That uniform method ignored variety-wise comparison and lacked a proper evidentiary basis, rendering the valuation arbitrary and the demand unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 07 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107891