<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (7) TMI 44 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439771</link>
    <description>For rough castings cleared to a sister unit, valuation under the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 was to follow comparable prices realised from unrelated buyers under Rule 6(b)(i) where no material distinction was shown between the goods sold externally and the goods transferred internally, and Rule 6(b)(ii) applied only if Rule 6(b)(i) failed. Under the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, Rule 8 did not extend to partial captive clearances because its unamended language covered goods not sold by the assessee; the later amendment widening it to goods not sold in whole or in part supported that reading. On that basis, the demand, interest and penalty could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2023 08:36:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=718314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 44 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439771</link>
      <description>For rough castings cleared to a sister unit, valuation under the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 was to follow comparable prices realised from unrelated buyers under Rule 6(b)(i) where no material distinction was shown between the goods sold externally and the goods transferred internally, and Rule 6(b)(ii) applied only if Rule 6(b)(i) failed. Under the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, Rule 8 did not extend to partial captive clearances because its unamended language covered goods not sold by the assessee; the later amendment widening it to goods not sold in whole or in part supported that reading. On that basis, the demand, interest and penalty could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>