https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390763 The Tribunal held that the appellant correctly valued components for captive consumption at 110% of production cost under Rule 8, rejecting the lower authority's decision to value them at sale prices to independent buyers. The demand for differential duty was deemed unsustainable, leading to setting aside of impugned orders and allowing the appeals. The case underscores adherence to prescribed valuation methods despite availability of higher sale prices to independent buyers. en-us Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jan 2020 06:51:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390763 The Tribunal held that the appellant correctly valued components for captive consumption at 110% of production cost under Rule 8, rejecting the lower authority's decision to value them at sale prices to independent buyers. The demand for differential duty was deemed unsustainable, leading to setting aside of impugned orders and allowing the appeals. The case underscores adherence to prescribed valuation methods despite availability of higher sale prices to independent buyers. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390763