https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205566 The tribunal upheld the decision of the lower authorities, confirming the demand for duty and penalty against the appellants. It concluded that the appellants were not entitled to the benefits of Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. at the time of debonding and that the duty liability should be assessed based on the provisions applicable to EOUs. The tribunal also rejected the appellants' arguments regarding the applicability of the Siv Industries decision and the bar of limitation. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the duty demand and penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority. en-us Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205566 The tribunal upheld the decision of the lower authorities, confirming the demand for duty and penalty against the appellants. It concluded that the appellants were not entitled to the benefits of Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. at the time of debonding and that the duty liability should be assessed based on the provisions applicable to EOUs. The tribunal also rejected the appellants' arguments regarding the applicability of the Siv Industries decision and the bar of limitation. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the duty demand and penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205566