https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115379 The tribunal upheld a duty demand of Rs. 7,92,858 on the appellant, a packaging tube manufacturer, for art work charges from 1998-99 to 2000-01. Despite the appellant's argument that charges were recorded in their books, the tribunal ruled the art work value was dutiable. It emphasized that Central Excise audits do not cover private accounts, just excise documents, justifying the extended duty period. The appellant was directed to pay the duty within eight weeks, with the penalty pre-deposit requirement waived, and compliance reporting was mandated. en-us Mon, 16 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 May 2012 11:54:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115379 The tribunal upheld a duty demand of Rs. 7,92,858 on the appellant, a packaging tube manufacturer, for art work charges from 1998-99 to 2000-01. Despite the appellant's argument that charges were recorded in their books, the tribunal ruled the art work value was dutiable. It emphasized that Central Excise audits do not cover private accounts, just excise documents, justifying the extended duty period. The appellant was directed to pay the duty within eight weeks, with the penalty pre-deposit requirement waived, and compliance reporting was mandated. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115379