https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114596 In valuing goods manufactured by a job worker under Rule 6(b)(ii), the Tribunal held that the excise duty element on raw material supplied to the job worker and taken as Modvat credit is not includible in the assessable value. It found no valid distinction between captive consumption and job-work valuation, and applied the principle in Dai Ichi Karkaria to treat Modvat credit as available for set-off rather than part of material cost. On that basis, the duty element on the raw material was excluded from the valuation of inputs for Section 4(1)(b) and Rule 6(b) purposes. en-us Thu, 06 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 May 2012 13:00:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114596 In valuing goods manufactured by a job worker under Rule 6(b)(ii), the Tribunal held that the excise duty element on raw material supplied to the job worker and taken as Modvat credit is not includible in the assessable value. It found no valid distinction between captive consumption and job-work valuation, and applied the principle in Dai Ichi Karkaria to treat Modvat credit as available for set-off rather than part of material cost. On that basis, the duty element on the raw material was excluded from the valuation of inputs for Section 4(1)(b) and Rule 6(b) purposes. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114596