https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348299 Valuation of bulk goods supplied for repacking was held to fall under cost of production with a reasonable profit under Rule 6(b)(ii), because the alleged comparable goods were not truly comparable on process, technology, composition, unit size, and terms of supply. The department's adoption of a notional profit element was treated as reasonable, and the challenge to valuation failed. On limitation, declarations describing the assessable value as based on comparable goods were found to involve wilful misstatement, so the demand was not time-barred. The impugned order was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jul 2018 12:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348299 Valuation of bulk goods supplied for repacking was held to fall under cost of production with a reasonable profit under Rule 6(b)(ii), because the alleged comparable goods were not truly comparable on process, technology, composition, unit size, and terms of supply. The department's adoption of a notional profit element was treated as reasonable, and the challenge to valuation failed. On limitation, declarations describing the assessable value as based on comparable goods were found to involve wilful misstatement, so the demand was not time-barred. The impugned order was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348299