https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203459 In a valuation dispute over medicines cleared both as MRP-marked goods under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and as physician's samples at a lower declared value, the Tribunal held that the department's prima facie position was sound that the same goods should not bear different duty burdens merely because different valuation methods were used. As no prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit was shown, the Tribunal directed a partial pre-deposit and waived the balance pending compliance with that direction. en-us Fri, 03 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 May 2011 09:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203459 In a valuation dispute over medicines cleared both as MRP-marked goods under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and as physician's samples at a lower declared value, the Tribunal held that the department's prima facie position was sound that the same goods should not bear different duty burdens merely because different valuation methods were used. As no prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit was shown, the Tribunal directed a partial pre-deposit and waived the balance pending compliance with that direction. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203459