https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461709 Where goods were cleared both to independent buyers at the factory gate and to a sister concern for captive consumption, the applicable valuation framework under Rule 4 of the Central Excise Rules, 2000 was applied on the facts found by the Tribunal, and differential duty was held not payable. The Court declined to disturb that factual conclusion and distinguished the Revenue's authorities as fact-specific. As the differential duty demand did not survive, interest on supplementary-invoice payments also could not be sustained. The Court additionally accepted the Tribunal's reliance on revenue neutrality and the incongruity of fastening interest liability in the circumstances, leaving the assessee's relief undisturbed. en-us Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Apr 2025 14:58:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461709 Where goods were cleared both to independent buyers at the factory gate and to a sister concern for captive consumption, the applicable valuation framework under Rule 4 of the Central Excise Rules, 2000 was applied on the facts found by the Tribunal, and differential duty was held not payable. The Court declined to disturb that factual conclusion and distinguished the Revenue's authorities as fact-specific. As the differential duty demand did not survive, interest on supplementary-invoice payments also could not be sustained. The Court additionally accepted the Tribunal's reliance on revenue neutrality and the incongruity of fastening interest liability in the circumstances, leaving the assessee's relief undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461709