https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74074 Goods fully exempted under Rule 8(1) remained excisable goods because their character depended on tariff description, not on actual duty incidence, so their value was includible in the aggregate clearances unless the notification expressly excluded them. Non-disclosure of manufacture and clearance of Tariff Item 68 goods, while exemption was claimed for other goods, constituted suppression and justified invocation of the extended limitation period. Penalty, however, was not warranted because the includibility of fully exempt goods was a genuinely unsettled question of law with divergent High Court views, making penal action inappropriate. Duty demands were sustained, the longer limitation period was upheld, and penalties were set aside. en-us Fri, 31 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:54:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74074 Goods fully exempted under Rule 8(1) remained excisable goods because their character depended on tariff description, not on actual duty incidence, so their value was includible in the aggregate clearances unless the notification expressly excluded them. Non-disclosure of manufacture and clearance of Tariff Item 68 goods, while exemption was claimed for other goods, constituted suppression and justified invocation of the extended limitation period. Penalty, however, was not warranted because the includibility of fully exempt goods was a genuinely unsettled question of law with divergent High Court views, making penal action inappropriate. Duty demands were sustained, the longer limitation period was upheld, and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 31 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74074