https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233983 The Tribunal upheld the department's decision, denying duty exemption to the appellant for failing to comply with Notification No. 50/2003-C.E. requirements. The extended period of limitation was deemed applicable due to lack of transparency, leading to penalties under Section 11AC and Rule 26. Goods valued at Rs. 36,70,277/- were seized and subject to confiscation under Rule 25. The appellant was directed to make pre-deposits to proceed with appeals, with compliance due by 28-12-2012. en-us Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 May 2013 17:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233983 The Tribunal upheld the department's decision, denying duty exemption to the appellant for failing to comply with Notification No. 50/2003-C.E. requirements. The extended period of limitation was deemed applicable due to lack of transparency, leading to penalties under Section 11AC and Rule 26. Goods valued at Rs. 36,70,277/- were seized and subject to confiscation under Rule 25. The appellant was directed to make pre-deposits to proceed with appeals, with compliance due by 28-12-2012. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233983