https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116727 Ceramic tableware was held to remain classifiable under the heading applied by the department, because the assessee had removed goods with an incorrect description and later altered its claim only to secure an unavailable exemption. The departmental classification was therefore upheld and the duty demand sustained. Misdeclaration made deliberately to obtain concessional duty was treated as conduct attracting penal consequences under the excise penalty provision, so the penalty was also sustained. The challenge to both demand and penalty failed, and the departmental order was affirmed in full. en-us Wed, 05 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:06:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116727 Ceramic tableware was held to remain classifiable under the heading applied by the department, because the assessee had removed goods with an incorrect description and later altered its claim only to secure an unavailable exemption. The departmental classification was therefore upheld and the duty demand sustained. Misdeclaration made deliberately to obtain concessional duty was treated as conduct attracting penal consequences under the excise penalty provision, so the penalty was also sustained. The challenge to both demand and penalty failed, and the departmental order was affirmed in full. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116727