https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766876 CESTAT Bangalore held that clinkers transferred by appellant to sister concern must be valued under Rule 4 read with Rule 11 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, not Rule 8. Following precedent from Ispat Industries case and appellant's own earlier case, the Tribunal determined this was the appropriate valuation method. Revenue neutrality principle cannot override statutory valuation provisions, as it is merely an equity principle, not statutory concept. Appeal allowed by way of remand for proper valuation application. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 07:35:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766876 CESTAT Bangalore held that clinkers transferred by appellant to sister concern must be valued under Rule 4 read with Rule 11 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, not Rule 8. Following precedent from Ispat Industries case and appellant's own earlier case, the Tribunal determined this was the appropriate valuation method. Revenue neutrality principle cannot override statutory valuation provisions, as it is merely an equity principle, not statutory concept. Appeal allowed by way of remand for proper valuation application. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766876