https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236389 Cassia meal was treated as a marketed cattle-feed supplement, with segregation, grading, collection and packing arrangements showing that it was not mere waste from the food industry. Exemption under Notification No. 23/2003-CE was therefore denied, and the alternative claim that it was waste of oil seeds also failed because cassia seeds were not established as oil seeds. On limitation and penalty, disclosed manufacturing details and the assessee's bona fide interpretative view meant suppression was not proved, so the extended period and penalty were not sustainable. Cum duty benefit was allowed, and confiscation was not justified. The demand survived only for the normal period with interest. en-us Thu, 06 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Aug 2013 17:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236389 Cassia meal was treated as a marketed cattle-feed supplement, with segregation, grading, collection and packing arrangements showing that it was not mere waste from the food industry. Exemption under Notification No. 23/2003-CE was therefore denied, and the alternative claim that it was waste of oil seeds also failed because cassia seeds were not established as oil seeds. On limitation and penalty, disclosed manufacturing details and the assessee's bona fide interpretative view meant suppression was not proved, so the extended period and penalty were not sustainable. Cum duty benefit was allowed, and confiscation was not justified. The demand survived only for the normal period with interest. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236389