https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336130 The judgment focused on the application of Rule 9 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules 2000 to related party transactions under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It emphasized the authority's obligation to re-determine the value of such transactions in accordance with the law and provide the appellant with a fair opportunity to present its defense. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, directing the lower authority to reconsider the case and issue a reasoned order within specified timelines, ensuring compliance with the valuation Rules and principles of law. en-us Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:07:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336130 The judgment focused on the application of Rule 9 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules 2000 to related party transactions under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It emphasized the authority's obligation to re-determine the value of such transactions in accordance with the law and provide the appellant with a fair opportunity to present its defense. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, directing the lower authority to reconsider the case and issue a reasoned order within specified timelines, ensuring compliance with the valuation Rules and principles of law. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336130