https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120789 The order confirming excise duty demand, penalty, and interest imposition was challenged based on alleged suppression of facts and confusion regarding valuation under Section 4A. The appellant, a telephone instrument manufacturer, was accused of evading duty by allegedly suppressing facts. Despite the Revenue's claim, the Tribunal found no suppression of material facts and invalidated the extended period of limitation. The confusion allegation was deemed vague, leading to the setting aside of the order confirming duty demand, penalty, and interest, allowing the appeal. en-us Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jul 2012 14:10:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120789 The order confirming excise duty demand, penalty, and interest imposition was challenged based on alleged suppression of facts and confusion regarding valuation under Section 4A. The appellant, a telephone instrument manufacturer, was accused of evading duty by allegedly suppressing facts. Despite the Revenue's claim, the Tribunal found no suppression of material facts and invalidated the extended period of limitation. The confusion allegation was deemed vague, leading to the setting aside of the order confirming duty demand, penalty, and interest, allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120789