CESTAT determined appellant's appeal was allowed. The Tribunal...

CESTAT determined appellant's appeal was allowed. The Tribunal ruled the demand for central excise duty was time-barred as mere non-payment of duties cannot justify invoking extended limitation period without evidence of willful suppression or misstatement. While the appellant was correctly denied SSI exemption due to exceeding turnover limits and was liable for duty on articles of jewellery from March 2016, they were entitled to cum-duty benefit. The Tribunal held that demanding duty on exported goods was unjustified as substantive compliance was met despite procedural shortcomings. Consequently, penalties under Section 11AC(1)(c) and Rule 26 were deemed unsustainable. The proceedings were found to comply with principles of natural justice.