https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444511 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, finding no justification for invoking the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000. It ruled that Rule 8 was inapplicable as most goods were sold to unrelated buyers at sole consideration. The Tribunal identified a violation of natural justice due to the non-disclosure of the Deputy Director's report. It agreed with the appellants that job charges should not be included in the assessable value and rejected the Revenue's argument on revenue neutrality. The decision was pronounced on 17/10/2023. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Oct 2023 07:40:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444511 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, finding no justification for invoking the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000. It ruled that Rule 8 was inapplicable as most goods were sold to unrelated buyers at sole consideration. The Tribunal identified a violation of natural justice due to the non-disclosure of the Deputy Director's report. It agreed with the appellants that job charges should not be included in the assessable value and rejected the Revenue's argument on revenue neutrality. The decision was pronounced on 17/10/2023. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444511