2008 (7) TMI 664

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Appellant. Dr. Gautam Ray, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. -  Heard both sides. 2. Shri Ravi Raghwan, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants states that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of electric storage batteries which they sell to various customers including to their subsidiary M/s. Caldyne Automatics Pv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder passed by the Adjudicating Commissioner and states that CAL is reselling the impugned goods at almost 25% higher value to other customers. He states that application of Rule 9 and Rule 10 of the Valuation Rules cannot be questioned as the same are applicable with reference to Rule 11. According to him, transaction value is to be determined for each removal and in view of Board's clarification....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d have investigated the rest of the sales and not questioned only 0.41% of the sales made through the subsidiary company. In the absence of any doubt raised in respect of the sale to independent buyers, the same has to be prima facie accepted as arms length and it has to be taken as an acceptable basis for valuation for sales to related persons. The ld. Advocate for the appellants has cited the de....