2007 (11) TMI 114

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1.  This appeal filed by the assessee is against a demand of differential duty on the goods cleared by them, during October, - December, 2000 to their holding-company viz. M/ UCAL Fuel Systems Ltd. The appellants had paid duty on the goods after determining its assessable value under Rule 8 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000. The department found that the assessable value determine....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ad a commercial basis and hence the value agreed to was the transaction value to be accepted under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act. Learned SDR has reiterated this case of the Revenuel Learned Consultant for the assessee has submitted that the Revenue's case is not even supported by the Board's Circular No. 354/81/2000/TRU, dated 30-6-2000, wherein the concept of transaction value introd....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... which should be applied to the facts of this case. It is not in dispute that the goods in question were sold to a related buyer [holding-company] who captively consumed the goods for further manufacture of excisable goods. A case where the related buyer does not sell the goods but consumes it in the manufacture of other goods is covered by the proviso to Rule 9. This proviso reads as under &nb....