https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54581 Under the sequential valuation scheme in Rule 6(b), excisable goods cleared to sister units could not be valued straightaway on a cost construction basis where comparable goods were available. Comparable-goods valuation under Rule 6(b)(i) had to be attempted first, and cost-based valuation under Rule 6(b)(ii) was permissible only if value could not be determined on that basis. Direct resort to cost construction without exhausting the comparable-goods method was impermissible, so the demand based on that approach was unsustainable and the order confirming duty, penalty, and interest was set aside. en-us Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:59:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54581 Under the sequential valuation scheme in Rule 6(b), excisable goods cleared to sister units could not be valued straightaway on a cost construction basis where comparable goods were available. Comparable-goods valuation under Rule 6(b)(i) had to be attempted first, and cost-based valuation under Rule 6(b)(ii) was permissible only if value could not be determined on that basis. Direct resort to cost construction without exhausting the comparable-goods method was impermissible, so the demand based on that approach was unsustainable and the order confirming duty, penalty, and interest was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54581