https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258721 The Tribunal held that the correct assessable value for excise duty should be based on the price prevailing at the depot from where the goods are actually sold. The extended period of limitation under Section 11A was invoked due to suppression of facts for a specific period, while penalties under Section 11AC were dropped as there was no suppression of facts. The demand for duty was upheld for most periods, except for a specific timeframe, and penalties for another period were removed. The adjudicating authority was instructed to recalculate and recover duty, interest, and penalties accordingly from the appellant. en-us Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 11:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258721 The Tribunal held that the correct assessable value for excise duty should be based on the price prevailing at the depot from where the goods are actually sold. The extended period of limitation under Section 11A was invoked due to suppression of facts for a specific period, while penalties under Section 11AC were dropped as there was no suppression of facts. The demand for duty was upheld for most periods, except for a specific timeframe, and penalties for another period were removed. The adjudicating authority was instructed to recalculate and recover duty, interest, and penalties accordingly from the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258721