https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262381 The case involved a dispute over Central Excise valuation of transactions between a manufacturing company and another entity. The Revenue claimed under-valuation due to the parties being related, but the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) disagreed, ruling that the extended limitation period did not apply. The Revenue argued mutuality of interest based on shareholding, but the Tribunal upheld the ld. Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, stating the Revenue failed to prove such mutuality. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing differences from a Supreme Court case cited. en-us Thu, 23 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Aug 2015 14:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262381 The case involved a dispute over Central Excise valuation of transactions between a manufacturing company and another entity. The Revenue claimed under-valuation due to the parties being related, but the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) disagreed, ruling that the extended limitation period did not apply. The Revenue argued mutuality of interest based on shareholding, but the Tribunal upheld the ld. Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, stating the Revenue failed to prove such mutuality. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing differences from a Supreme Court case cited. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262381