2017 (12) TMI 839

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ril 2010 to December 2010. During the course of audit of the records of the appellant, the department noticed that the appellant was clearing certain goods to their own sister concern situated elsewhere. The duty payable on such goods was determined on the basis of the transaction value adopted in respect of sale to unrelated parties. The department was of the view that the valuation of clearances made by the appellant to their own sister concern are to be done in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 read with Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, valuation of goods for payment of duty in respect of clearances to their sister concern was re-determined on the basis of the CAS-4 certificate issued by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... hearing both sides and perusal of records, we find that the dispute relates to valuation of goods which were cleared by the appellant to their own sister concern. It stands admitted that such clearances are to be valued on the basis of the value adopted in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000 read with Section 4 of the Act. The differential duty also has been worked out on the basis of the CAS -4 certificate issued by the Cost Accountant. The appellant has further not disputed the differential duty payable, which already stands paid along with interest. The appeal is confined to the challenge to the penalty imposed in the impugned order. 5.1 We have gone through the various case laws cited by the appellant and we not....