https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781621 CESTAT MUMBAI - AT allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudicating order. The Tribunal held that although the buyer is an interconnected undertaking, the record did not establish the specific relationships (distributorship, dealership or similar) required under Rule 9 or the job-work arrangement necessary to invoke Rules 10/10A of the Valuation Rules. Consequently the authorities erred in treating the transaction as a related-party job work supply and in adopting valuation under Rule 10A; there were insufficient grounds to revalue the excisable goods as done by the impugned order. en-us Thu, 23 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Nov 2025 08:52:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781621 CESTAT MUMBAI - AT allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudicating order. The Tribunal held that although the buyer is an interconnected undertaking, the record did not establish the specific relationships (distributorship, dealership or similar) required under Rule 9 or the job-work arrangement necessary to invoke Rules 10/10A of the Valuation Rules. Consequently the authorities erred in treating the transaction as a related-party job work supply and in adopting valuation under Rule 10A; there were insufficient grounds to revalue the excisable goods as done by the impugned order. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781621