https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211056 Where excisable goods were manufactured on job work basis and cleared to the principal manufacturer for further use, the issue was whether valuation had to be determined under Rule 8 read with Rule 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules or under the residual rule. The Tribunal held Rule 8 was inapplicable because the job worker neither consumed the goods nor were they consumed "on his behalf" by the principal, as required by Rule 8. With Rules 2-10 not fitting the fact situation, Rule 11 applied, requiring reasonable means consistent with Section 4. Applying the SC ratio in Ujagar Prints, assessable value was cost of materials plus job charges; the adopted valuation was upheld and the demand was set aside, allowing the appeals. en-us Wed, 30 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Dec 2025 14:18:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211056 Where excisable goods were manufactured on job work basis and cleared to the principal manufacturer for further use, the issue was whether valuation had to be determined under Rule 8 read with Rule 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules or under the residual rule. The Tribunal held Rule 8 was inapplicable because the job worker neither consumed the goods nor were they consumed "on his behalf" by the principal, as required by Rule 8. With Rules 2-10 not fitting the fact situation, Rule 11 applied, requiring reasonable means consistent with Section 4. Applying the SC ratio in Ujagar Prints, assessable value was cost of materials plus job charges; the adopted valuation was upheld and the demand was set aside, allowing the appeals. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211056