https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219528 For clearances from a Hundred Percent EOU, the duty remained excise duty even though it was computed with customs tariff rates, so limitation was governed by Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and not the Customs Act regime. Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules and Sections 13 and 23 of the Customs Act were held inapplicable because they concern loss or destruction before removal or imported goods still under customs control. The duty demand was therefore within limitation and the remission claim failed. The penalty was set aside because the order did not clearly identify the statutory basis or record the required finding of confiscation liability, and no mala fides were proved. en-us Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219528 For clearances from a Hundred Percent EOU, the duty remained excise duty even though it was computed with customs tariff rates, so limitation was governed by Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and not the Customs Act regime. Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules and Sections 13 and 23 of the Customs Act were held inapplicable because they concern loss or destruction before removal or imported goods still under customs control. The duty demand was therefore within limitation and the remission claim failed. The penalty was set aside because the order did not clearly identify the statutory basis or record the required finding of confiscation liability, and no mala fides were proved. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219528