https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97192 For excise valuation, the realized sale price charged to dummy companies was treated as cum-duty price because duty formed part of the consideration and could not be separately passed on; the duty already payable was abated from that price for computing differential duty. In settlement proceedings, cooperation and full disclosure supported immunity from interest, confiscation, penalty and prosecution. Interest under Section 11AB was held inapplicable to earlier years, and Section 11AC was treated as prospective only. The settlement was accordingly concluded on a cum-duty basis, with the quantified duty liability confirmed and statutory safeguards preserved. en-us Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Jan 2012 12:59:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97192 For excise valuation, the realized sale price charged to dummy companies was treated as cum-duty price because duty formed part of the consideration and could not be separately passed on; the duty already payable was abated from that price for computing differential duty. In settlement proceedings, cooperation and full disclosure supported immunity from interest, confiscation, penalty and prosecution. Interest under Section 11AB was held inapplicable to earlier years, and Section 11AC was treated as prospective only. The settlement was accordingly concluded on a cum-duty basis, with the quantified duty liability confirmed and statutory safeguards preserved. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97192