https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120899 Extended limitation under the Central Excise Act was confined only to the period from March 2000 onwards, because manufacture was not established for the earlier period and the department was aware of the registration request. Duty demand for the phase in which production was done at job workers' premises and only labelling occurred at the assessee's premises was unsustainable. Where duty became payable, the sale price had to be treated as cum-duty price for recomputation of duty and interest, and Modvat credit on inputs and capital goods was admissible subject to duty-paying documents and verification. Penalty under Section 11AC and personal penalties were not warranted absent proof of suppression or mala fide intent, though a reduced Rule 173Q penalty was retained for the non-registration period. en-us Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:37:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120899 Extended limitation under the Central Excise Act was confined only to the period from March 2000 onwards, because manufacture was not established for the earlier period and the department was aware of the registration request. Duty demand for the phase in which production was done at job workers' premises and only labelling occurred at the assessee's premises was unsustainable. Where duty became payable, the sale price had to be treated as cum-duty price for recomputation of duty and interest, and Modvat credit on inputs and capital goods was admissible subject to duty-paying documents and verification. Penalty under Section 11AC and personal penalties were not warranted absent proof of suppression or mala fide intent, though a reduced Rule 173Q penalty was retained for the non-registration period. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120899