https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81047 Conscious nondisclosure after acquisition of the unit was treated as suppression, so the limitation objection failed and the demand was held in time. Where excisable goods were manufactured and removed without licence, Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules was held applicable. For Notification No. 176/77, capital investment in plant and machinery had to be computed with reference to the industrial unit as a whole, not the appellant's purchase price; the generating set was excluded, but the connected items were included as part of the installed machinery, leaving the investment above the exemption threshold and defeating the exemption claim. en-us Mon, 14 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jun 2011 10:44:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81047 Conscious nondisclosure after acquisition of the unit was treated as suppression, so the limitation objection failed and the demand was held in time. Where excisable goods were manufactured and removed without licence, Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules was held applicable. For Notification No. 176/77, capital investment in plant and machinery had to be computed with reference to the industrial unit as a whole, not the appellant's purchase price; the generating set was excluded, but the connected items were included as part of the installed machinery, leaving the investment above the exemption threshold and defeating the exemption claim. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 14 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81047