https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74976 For excise valuation under Section 4(4)(d)(ii), only the duty actually paid is deductible from the cum-duty price; the benefit of an incentive exemption notification is not separately excluded for valuation purposes, and the department's valuation was upheld. On limitation, the demand was not treated as arising from finalisation of a provisional assessment under Rule 9-B, because the notice proceeded on short levy with suppression under Section 11A. The plea that limitation did not apply on a provisional-assessment basis was therefore rejected, and the demand was not held barred by limitation. en-us Tue, 29 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:12:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74976 For excise valuation under Section 4(4)(d)(ii), only the duty actually paid is deductible from the cum-duty price; the benefit of an incentive exemption notification is not separately excluded for valuation purposes, and the department's valuation was upheld. On limitation, the demand was not treated as arising from finalisation of a provisional assessment under Rule 9-B, because the notice proceeded on short levy with suppression under Section 11A. The plea that limitation did not apply on a provisional-assessment basis was therefore rejected, and the demand was not held barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74976