https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451129 Calcined alumina cleared in bulk to a sister unit was treated as a distinct product from calcined alumina sold to independent buyers in packed form, because the two clearances differed in technical specifications, composition and mode of removal. On those facts, valuation under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules was held to be correct for captive clearances, and the market sale price could not be substituted. The demand also failed on limitation, because the clearances were revenue neutral and the extended period was not sustainable. en-us Tue, 05 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Mar 2024 06:58:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451129 Calcined alumina cleared in bulk to a sister unit was treated as a distinct product from calcined alumina sold to independent buyers in packed form, because the two clearances differed in technical specifications, composition and mode of removal. On those facts, valuation under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules was held to be correct for captive clearances, and the market sale price could not be substituted. The demand also failed on limitation, because the clearances were revenue neutral and the extended period was not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451129