https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299258 Non-grant of a separate personal hearing before approval of the price list did not vitiate the proceedings where the assessee's objection on pattern-cost includibility was later considered in duty-recovery proceedings, so no substantive prejudice was shown. On valuation, the cost of patterns used to manufacture castings had to be included in assessable value only on a proportionate basis, because a pattern yields multiple castings and its cost cannot be loaded in full on a limited number of units. The duty demand therefore had to be recalculated on apportionment over the expected quantity capable of being produced from the patterns. The appeal succeeded on this issue and the matter was remanded for fresh working in accordance with law. en-us Wed, 21 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:32:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299258 Non-grant of a separate personal hearing before approval of the price list did not vitiate the proceedings where the assessee's objection on pattern-cost includibility was later considered in duty-recovery proceedings, so no substantive prejudice was shown. On valuation, the cost of patterns used to manufacture castings had to be included in assessable value only on a proportionate basis, because a pattern yields multiple castings and its cost cannot be loaded in full on a limited number of units. The duty demand therefore had to be recalculated on apportionment over the expected quantity capable of being produced from the patterns. The appeal succeeded on this issue and the matter was remanded for fresh working in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299258