https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448925 CESTAT Chennai ruled in favor of appellant regarding valuation dispute under Central Excise Act, 1944. Department contended goods should be valued per Rule 10A under Section 4(1)(b), treating transaction as principal-to-principal rather than job work arrangement. Tribunal followed its earlier decision in identical case involving same parties, setting aside duty demand, interest and penalties imposed on both appellant and related entity. Appeals were allowed and impugned orders set aside based on judicial discipline principle. en-us Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:49:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448925 CESTAT Chennai ruled in favor of appellant regarding valuation dispute under Central Excise Act, 1944. Department contended goods should be valued per Rule 10A under Section 4(1)(b), treating transaction as principal-to-principal rather than job work arrangement. Tribunal followed its earlier decision in identical case involving same parties, setting aside duty demand, interest and penalties imposed on both appellant and related entity. Appeals were allowed and impugned orders set aside based on judicial discipline principle. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448925