https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126619 Undervaluation allegations were examined under two valuation regimes. For clearances before 1-7-2000, assessable value had to be determined on the statutory basis of normal price under Section 4(1)(a), and could not be fixed by mechanically applying a uniform cash-collection percentage across all clearances; the duty for that period required re-quantification on an evidence-based, variety-wise basis. For clearances on or after 1-7-2000, valuation had to follow transaction value, and the duty demand had to be worked out transaction-wise from the evidence. Confiscation of the seized goods and redemption fine were upheld, and penalties on the dealers from whose premises the goods were seized were sustained, while other penalties were remanded. en-us Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jul 2017 14:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126619 Undervaluation allegations were examined under two valuation regimes. For clearances before 1-7-2000, assessable value had to be determined on the statutory basis of normal price under Section 4(1)(a), and could not be fixed by mechanically applying a uniform cash-collection percentage across all clearances; the duty for that period required re-quantification on an evidence-based, variety-wise basis. For clearances on or after 1-7-2000, valuation had to follow transaction value, and the duty demand had to be worked out transaction-wise from the evidence. Confiscation of the seized goods and redemption fine were upheld, and penalties on the dealers from whose premises the goods were seized were sustained, while other penalties were remanded. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126619