https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165616 Retail sales required assessable value to be determined by a proper Rule-based deduction from the retail price so that the net value reflected the wholesale price, and the appellate authority found that the Assistant Collector had not adequately examined the primary Rule 6(a) contention or comparable wholesale values. The valuation question was therefore set aside for fresh examination. The objection that the demand was barred because the Superintendent had reviewed a final order without jurisdiction failed, as the duty had been demanded under Rule 10 for alleged short levy due to inadvertence, error, misconstruction or misstatement. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for de novo determination of price and assessable value. en-us Thu, 18 Aug 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Aug 2014 10:25:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165616 Retail sales required assessable value to be determined by a proper Rule-based deduction from the retail price so that the net value reflected the wholesale price, and the appellate authority found that the Assistant Collector had not adequately examined the primary Rule 6(a) contention or comparable wholesale values. The valuation question was therefore set aside for fresh examination. The objection that the demand was barred because the Superintendent had reviewed a final order without jurisdiction failed, as the duty had been demanded under Rule 10 for alleged short levy due to inadvertence, error, misconstruction or misstatement. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for de novo determination of price and assessable value. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 18 Aug 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165616