https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97221 Mutually contradictory findings on suppression, duty liability and penalty could not sustain the impugned quasi-judicial order, because the basis for invoking the extended period and fastening liability was left unresolved. The valuation issue, including actual costs and the correctness of the declared value, also required fresh examination, since quantification of duty would directly affect any penalty. The CEGAT therefore set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh disposal in accordance with law, after hearing the parties and, if necessary, obtaining further information. All substantive questions on duty and penalty were left open for reconsideration. en-us Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:17:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97221 Mutually contradictory findings on suppression, duty liability and penalty could not sustain the impugned quasi-judicial order, because the basis for invoking the extended period and fastening liability was left unresolved. The valuation issue, including actual costs and the correctness of the declared value, also required fresh examination, since quantification of duty would directly affect any penalty. The CEGAT therefore set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh disposal in accordance with law, after hearing the parties and, if necessary, obtaining further information. All substantive questions on duty and penalty were left open for reconsideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97221