https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757818 CESTAT Hyderabad allowed the appeal of job work appellant who was paying excise duty on assessable value. Revenue contended duty should be calculated using cost construction method rather than principal manufacturer's price to buyers, invoking extended limitation period. CESTAT held transaction value method was correct as appellant had no role in price fixing and no additional consideration flowed from buyers. Cost construction method couldn't be presumed higher than transaction value without evidence of additional consideration. Extended period was time-barred as appellant had disclosed their procedure in 2005 letter and audit queries were raised in 2009. Appeal allowed on both merits and limitation grounds. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2024 08:26:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757818 CESTAT Hyderabad allowed the appeal of job work appellant who was paying excise duty on assessable value. Revenue contended duty should be calculated using cost construction method rather than principal manufacturer's price to buyers, invoking extended limitation period. CESTAT held transaction value method was correct as appellant had no role in price fixing and no additional consideration flowed from buyers. Cost construction method couldn't be presumed higher than transaction value without evidence of additional consideration. Extended period was time-barred as appellant had disclosed their procedure in 2005 letter and audit queries were raised in 2009. Appeal allowed on both merits and limitation grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757818