https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359628 A prima facie view accepted that valuation of job-worked goods could be governed by the principles applied in prior Tribunal decisions where the goods were not cleared or sold from the job worker's premises but were returned to the principal manufacturer. On that basis, the Commissioner (Appeals)' application of Rule 10A(iii) instead of Rule 10A(ii) was not found to disclose any infirmity requiring interim interference. The Revenue therefore failed to make out a case for stay, and the stay applications were rejected. en-us Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 May 2018 06:31:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359628 A prima facie view accepted that valuation of job-worked goods could be governed by the principles applied in prior Tribunal decisions where the goods were not cleared or sold from the job worker's premises but were returned to the principal manufacturer. On that basis, the Commissioner (Appeals)' application of Rule 10A(iii) instead of Rule 10A(ii) was not found to disclose any infirmity requiring interim interference. The Revenue therefore failed to make out a case for stay, and the stay applications were rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359628