https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73281 Goods listed in the First Schedule remained excisable goods even when temporarily exempted under a separate Rule 8(1) notification, so their value had to be included in computing the aggregate clearances for exemption under Notification No. 71/78-C.E. as amended by Notification No. 141/79-C.E.; on that basis, Tariff Item 68 clearances were counted and the exemption claim for 1979-80 failed. The Tribunal also treated the omission of Tariff Item 68 figures from the statutory classification list as suppression of facts, because the information was available to the manufacturer but not disclosed in the relevant declaration, and therefore upheld use of the extended limitation period for the duty demand. en-us Wed, 16 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 May 2011 17:26:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73281 Goods listed in the First Schedule remained excisable goods even when temporarily exempted under a separate Rule 8(1) notification, so their value had to be included in computing the aggregate clearances for exemption under Notification No. 71/78-C.E. as amended by Notification No. 141/79-C.E.; on that basis, Tariff Item 68 clearances were counted and the exemption claim for 1979-80 failed. The Tribunal also treated the omission of Tariff Item 68 figures from the statutory classification list as suppression of facts, because the information was available to the manufacturer but not disclosed in the relevant declaration, and therefore upheld use of the extended limitation period for the duty demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73281