2005 (2) TMI 673

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri S.C. Pushkarna, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. -  Heard ld. SDR. M/s. Birdi Steels made a request to decide the appeal on merits. 2. M/s. Birdi Steels filed these appeals against order-in-appeal whereby the differential duty is confirmed and penalties were imposed. 3. The dispute in this case is in respect of the valuation of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....where the Tribunal held that Rule 8 & 9 of the Valuation Rules are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The Tribunal in the earlier case of the appellant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. 478. In this case the Tribunal held that the valuation of goods sold to or through relat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n respect of sale to the independent customers is available, therefore, the goods are to be assessed at the same rate at which were cleared to the related persons. As the duty was demanded after taking into consideration the same price to the independent buyers, therefore, we find no infirmity in respect of the demand of duty and imposition of penalty in the impugned order. The appeals filed by th....