https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153803 Loading charges for finished goods were includible in assessable value for the period before 1-7-2000 under the settled valuation position, but for the period after 1-7-2000 they were not includible where the burden was borne by the buyer and not recovered by the assessee. The extended period of limitation was not available because the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts and the dispute was a bona fide valuation issue, so wilful suppression with intent to evade duty was not established. On that basis, penalty under Section 11AC was not sustainable. Penalty under Rule 173Q could still apply to short-payment within the normal period, but the quantum required fresh determination. en-us Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:54:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153803 Loading charges for finished goods were includible in assessable value for the period before 1-7-2000 under the settled valuation position, but for the period after 1-7-2000 they were not includible where the burden was borne by the buyer and not recovered by the assessee. The extended period of limitation was not available because the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts and the dispute was a bona fide valuation issue, so wilful suppression with intent to evade duty was not established. On that basis, penalty under Section 11AC was not sustainable. Penalty under Rule 173Q could still apply to short-payment within the normal period, but the quantum required fresh determination. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153803