https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106992 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for evasion of duty. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant's argument that the assessable value should be based on the factory gate price rather than the higher depot prices. The demand for duty from July 1988 to June 1992 was deemed time-barred due to the department's awareness of the price difference since 1987, leading to a lack of suppression of facts. The Commissioner's decision was criticized for ignoring crucial correspondence and incorrectly inferring lack of knowledge regarding price differences. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2012 18:38:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106992 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for evasion of duty. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant's argument that the assessable value should be based on the factory gate price rather than the higher depot prices. The demand for duty from July 1988 to June 1992 was deemed time-barred due to the department's awareness of the price difference since 1987, leading to a lack of suppression of facts. The Commissioner's decision was criticized for ignoring crucial correspondence and incorrectly inferring lack of knowledge regarding price differences. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106992