https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111147 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the duty demand and penalties. The method adopted by the appellants for valuation was consistent with industry practices, and there was no suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The extended period for demand under Section 11A was not justified. The proceedings were deemed unnecessary and unjust, leading to the success of the appeals and consequential relief to the appellants. en-us Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:03:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111147 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the duty demand and penalties. The method adopted by the appellants for valuation was consistent with industry practices, and there was no suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The extended period for demand under Section 11A was not justified. The proceedings were deemed unnecessary and unjust, leading to the success of the appeals and consequential relief to the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111147