Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.59 seconds)
H.J.Rathi vs Cce Raigad on 26 November, 2018 cites

Alembic Glass Industries Limited vs Collector Of Central Excise & Customs on 11 April, 2002

b) Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2002 (143) ELT 244 (SC) 5.3 Learned Counsel for the appellants has also submitted that it was alleged that M/s.JTC was related as partners of M/s.JTC were relatives of the appellants/directors and M/s.JTC of the appellant; on occasions goods were moving directly from the appellants factory to M/s.JTC customers under the cover of M/s.JTC invoice and certain staff of M/s.JTC were sitting in the appellants premises. It is submitted that even when such conditions existed, it does not automatically proved that either relationship or the mutuality of interest or flow back.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 26 - Full Document

Cce, Aurangabad / vs Goodyear South Asia Tyres Pvt. Ltd. / on 16 June, 2015

d) CCE Vs. Goodyear South Asia Tyres Pvt. Ltd. - 2015 (322) ELT 389 (SC) 5.5 Learned Counsel further submitted that the Tribunal has been taking a consistent view that where assessee is selling the goods to related persons as well as to an independent customer then the price at which the goods are sold to the independent customers should be adopted in terms of Rule 4 of Valuation Rules, 2000. The Rule 4 has to be preferred over Rule9 where the sale price of very same goods is available to an independent customer. He relied upon the following decisions:
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 1 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1   2 Next