https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767569 CESTAT Mumbai held that valuation of excisable goods between inter-connected undertakings should be determined under Rule 10 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, not Rule 8-9. The tribunal found that mere inter-connection between undertakings does not automatically establish a "related person" relationship under Section 4(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Revenue authorities failed to provide evidence establishing the relationship as required by law. The tribunal relied on precedents from Gajra Gears and Ramsons Casting cases, emphasizing that specific determination of relationship is mandatory before applying related party valuation rules. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Mar 2025 08:25:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767569 CESTAT Mumbai held that valuation of excisable goods between inter-connected undertakings should be determined under Rule 10 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000, not Rule 8-9. The tribunal found that mere inter-connection between undertakings does not automatically establish a "related person" relationship under Section 4(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Revenue authorities failed to provide evidence establishing the relationship as required by law. The tribunal relied on precedents from Gajra Gears and Ramsons Casting cases, emphasizing that specific determination of relationship is mandatory before applying related party valuation rules. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767569