https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110079 The case involved the interpretation of an agreement for the sale of annealed powder, focusing on pricing, minimum purchase quantity, and a commitment not to manufacture the product for 10 years. The appellant justified the reduced price to the largest buyer based on its significant share of purchases. The department invoked an extended period of limitation due to alleged suppression of facts but failed to address the appellant's submission that agreement terms were disclosed. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeals, setting aside the order, and granting consequential relief. en-us Tue, 09 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Apr 2012 16:32:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110079 The case involved the interpretation of an agreement for the sale of annealed powder, focusing on pricing, minimum purchase quantity, and a commitment not to manufacture the product for 10 years. The appellant justified the reduced price to the largest buyer based on its significant share of purchases. The department invoked an extended period of limitation due to alleged suppression of facts but failed to address the appellant's submission that agreement terms were disclosed. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeals, setting aside the order, and granting consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110079