https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387987 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal concerning the valuation of physician's samples manufactured by the appellant as a job-worker. The Tribunal affirmed that the appropriate valuation method aligns with section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, rather than section 4A, as the samples were not intended for retail sale. The decision emphasizes the relevance of the 'cost construction' method in job-work scenarios, consistent with precedents like the Ujagar Prints case, thereby rejecting the original authority's valuation approach under Rule 4. en-us Fri, 18 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Nov 2024 13:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387987 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal concerning the valuation of physician's samples manufactured by the appellant as a job-worker. The Tribunal affirmed that the appropriate valuation method aligns with section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, rather than section 4A, as the samples were not intended for retail sale. The decision emphasizes the relevance of the 'cost construction' method in job-work scenarios, consistent with precedents like the Ujagar Prints case, thereby rejecting the original authority's valuation approach under Rule 4. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387987