https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325711 A remand order was not treated as suffering from any rectifiable mistake because the dispute turned on unresolved facts, including whether the assessee made independent sales during the relevant period. The Tribunal noted that the valuation principle could not be applied conclusively without clear factual findings from the adjudicating authority, so the remand was not an error apparent on the record. The argument based on an earlier order in the assessee's own case was rejected because the present period involved distinct factual issues, including the effect of the amendment to Rule 8 of the valuation rules. The request to replace the remand with a final allowance therefore failed. en-us Tue, 05 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Mar 2016 06:59:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325711 A remand order was not treated as suffering from any rectifiable mistake because the dispute turned on unresolved facts, including whether the assessee made independent sales during the relevant period. The Tribunal noted that the valuation principle could not be applied conclusively without clear factual findings from the adjudicating authority, so the remand was not an error apparent on the record. The argument based on an earlier order in the assessee's own case was rejected because the present period involved distinct factual issues, including the effect of the amendment to Rule 8 of the valuation rules. The request to replace the remand with a final allowance therefore failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325711