https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72092 Laminated jute bags were treated as a new product and, following earlier Calcutta High Court rulings, were held not to fall under Item 22A; the residuary Item 68 applied for the relevant period. The exemption claim under Notification No. 179/77-C.E. was remitted for fresh adjudication because the factual question whether the bags were manufactured without power had not been examined and required verification after hearing the assessee. The demand was confined to the normal six-month period under Rule 10, as suppression was negatived where the department was already aware of the material facts. en-us Mon, 30 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 May 2011 17:24:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72092 Laminated jute bags were treated as a new product and, following earlier Calcutta High Court rulings, were held not to fall under Item 22A; the residuary Item 68 applied for the relevant period. The exemption claim under Notification No. 179/77-C.E. was remitted for fresh adjudication because the factual question whether the bags were manufactured without power had not been examined and required verification after hearing the assessee. The demand was confined to the normal six-month period under Rule 10, as suppression was negatived where the department was already aware of the material facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72092