Physician samples sold to distributors are assessable under Section 4 (1) (a) of the Central Excise Act and not under Rule 6 (b) (ii) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules as found by Revenue - CCE Vs. Sun Pharmaceuticals Inds Ltd 2016-TIOL-10-SC-CX.

 Deposits collected by manufacturer for booking motorcycle from customers does not constitute ‘additional consideration’ for paying excise duty as such deposits had no effect of lowering the sale prices of the motorcycles - CCE Vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd 2016 -TIOL - 01 - SC - CX.

 Sale price agreed between two competing parties may get depressed, when huge advances are periodically extended and given with the objective that the sale price paid would be lowered but there should be a link between the money advanced and it should be established as the basis for depression of sale price - Commr. of C.Ex., Pune Vs Hindustan National Glass & Industries Ltd. – 2016 332 E.L.T 193 S.C.

 Attachment of bank account of assesse without waiting for reply to show cause notice or without affording opportunity of being heard or without issuing notice of recovery is in gross violation of Rule 3 of Service tax Provisional attachment of Property Rules, 2008 read with Circular dated 01.07.2008 - Kunj Power Project Private Ltd Vs UOI - 2016 41 STR 3 (All).

 There is nothing wrong in utilisation of credit of one unit by another under ISD without pro rata distribution during period prior to amendment to concerned rules - CCE Vs. Dashion Limited 2016-TIOL-111-HC-AHM-ST.

 Writ not maintainable for quashing summons for enquiry into activities of assesse - Siri Restaurant and Bar Vs. - CCE 2016 41 STR177 (A.P).

 Service of adjudication order on a member of family is sufficient service - Jyoti Enterprises Vs. CCE 2016 41 STR 19 (All.).

 Simultaneous penalty under Section 76 and 78 cannot be imposed for the period prior to the amendment of Section 78 with effect from 16.05.2008 - Raval Trading Company Vs.CST - 2016-TIOL-112-HC-AHM-ST.

 Mandatory pre-deposit not applicable for appeals re- filed after rectification when original appeal was filed prior to date of coming to effect of amended provision regarding pre deposit - Roshanlal Gupta and Sons Pvt Ltd Vs. UOI - 2016 331 ELT 239 (Guj.).

 Writ is maintainable against adjudication order inspite of alternate remedy when the very authority to issue show cause notice and further proceedings pursuant thereto has been questioned - Spectra Fashions Vs. UOI - 2016 331 ELT 242 Cal.

 Interest is payable on delayed payment of duty due to price escalation clause when assesse had not filed declaration under Rule 7 (1) for provisional assessment without which the assessment would not be deemed as provisional - CCE Vs. Pre Stressed Udyog India Pvt Ltd 2016 331 ELT 539 (Jhar.)

 Assessee opting for settlement and accepting duty liability cannot challenge penalties on merits as penalty on merits has to be first adjudged in adjudication - CCE Vs. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd - 2016 331 ELT 550 (Cal.).

 Challenge to vires of Notification Nos.34/2015-CE and 37/2015-CE on ground of same being discriminatory set aside - HLG Trading Vs. Union of India 2016 331 ELT 561 (Mad.).

 High Court quashes order of adjudicating authority setting off refund due to assesee against duties under another order where issue is pending in appeal - Larsen and Toubro Ltd Vs. UOI - 2016 331 ELT 353 (Bom.).

 Highcourt remands issue involving formula for calculating trading turnover under Rule 6 (3A) for the period prior to 01.04.2011 to CESTAT - Mercedes Benz India Pvt Ltd Vs. CCE - 2016-TIOL-105-HC-MUM-CX.

 Decision of Board of approval fixing norm of 2% for EOU as maximum permissible limit of sale of rejects/scraps/waste/ remnants in a domestic market has been struck down as arbitrary especially when a higher limit has been prescribed for preceding years by development commissioner - Jain Grani Marmo Pvt Ltd Vs. UOI - 2016-TIOL-03-HC-RAJ-CUS.

 Drawback claim cannot be kept pending indefinitely for reason that assessee had indulged in misdeclaration of same type of goods during later period - JSR International Vs. UOI - 2016-TIOL-25-HC-AHM-CUS.

 Time limit of 12 months prescribed for review under Rule 23(2) of Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995) is subject to extension under Rule 17 (1) - Fairdeal Polychem LLP Vs. UOI - 2016-TIOL-46-HC-DEL-CUS.