https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259753 In excise valuation, inter-unit clearances were assessed under the statutory valuation scheme, and the negotiated price charged to the assessee's own unit was not accepted as a reason to depart from Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. For one model of vacuum interrupter tube, the highest price from a solitary third-party sale could not be mechanically adopted where other comparable sales at lower and more reliable prices were available; valuation had to reflect a fair and reasonable comparison under the Central Excise Valuation Rules, including Rule 6(b)(ii). The demand was substantially sustained, but valuation was corrected for the affected model, giving partial relief. en-us Tue, 05 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259753 In excise valuation, inter-unit clearances were assessed under the statutory valuation scheme, and the negotiated price charged to the assessee's own unit was not accepted as a reason to depart from Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. For one model of vacuum interrupter tube, the highest price from a solitary third-party sale could not be mechanically adopted where other comparable sales at lower and more reliable prices were available; valuation had to reflect a fair and reasonable comparison under the Central Excise Valuation Rules, including Rule 6(b)(ii). The demand was substantially sustained, but valuation was corrected for the affected model, giving partial relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259753