https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74019 For excise valuation, the law in force on the date of the show cause notice was applied, so the retrospective amendment to the valuation provision governed the demand. Amounts recovered from buyers above the concessional duty actually paid were treated as part of assessable value because they represented undisclosed consideration, and approval of the price list did not bar recovery where material facts were withheld. On the same facts, the extended limitation period was upheld because the manufacturer disclosed only the concessional duty paid while suppressing the full effective duty recovered from buyers. The appeals therefore failed on valuation and limitation. en-us Wed, 14 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:28:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74019 For excise valuation, the law in force on the date of the show cause notice was applied, so the retrospective amendment to the valuation provision governed the demand. Amounts recovered from buyers above the concessional duty actually paid were treated as part of assessable value because they represented undisclosed consideration, and approval of the price list did not bar recovery where material facts were withheld. On the same facts, the extended limitation period was upheld because the manufacturer disclosed only the concessional duty paid while suppressing the full effective duty recovered from buyers. The appeals therefore failed on valuation and limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74019