TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 1080
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sposing of the stay petition, we take up the appeal for itself for disposal. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that during EA-2000 audit, it was observed that during 2007-08 to 2011-12, the appellant had cleared finished goods to their various units/sister concern units/units of group company situated at various places and had paid the Central Excise duty without applying proper valuation method and thereby short paid duty of excise. Department's contention is that whenever the excisable goods are cleared to related persons/sister concern/units of group company, the valuation should be done as per Rule 8 and/or 9 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 (hereinafter referred to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4 certificates for the relevant period. Against such an order, this appeal is filed. 3. Learned Counsel draws our attention to the show cause notice, impugned order. It is his submission that the appellant had manufactured the products which they cleared to their own sister concern and also to independent buyers. It is his submission that when the clearance took place to their sister concern, appellant has discharged duty liability on the value which was charged by them to independent buyers. It is his submission that this was the correct law which has been followed by them and this law is settled by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd. - 2007 (209) E.L.T. 185. It is his submission that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a sale. We find that for determining the correct value under Section 4(i)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, provisions of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 needs to be followed. In the said provisions, Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules clearly indicates that the value of excisable goods shall be based on such goods sold by the assessee. In order to appreciate the correct position of law, we reproduce the said Rule. "RULE 4. The value of the excisable goods shall be based on the value of such goods sold by the assessee for delivery at any other time nearest to the time of the removal of goods under assessment, subject, if necessary, to such adjustment on account of the difference in the dates of delivery of such goods and of the ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es. Any other interpretation would only lead to confusion and chaos. Since the applicability of Rule 4 is not really in dispute, there was no need to look further and regardless of the applicability or otherwise of Rule 8, the assessable value should have been determined in terms of Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules. 8. The conclusion that we are drawing in the present case would lead to determination of a value which, in our view, will not only be reasonable but also consistent with the provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. We would, at this stage, draw support from the judgment of the Supreme Court in the assessee's own case, as reported in 2006 (202) E.L.T. 561, wherein the Court applied "The Gunapradhan Principle" in in....