https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260614 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the department, stating that duty should be paid inclusive of freight charges, rejecting the applicant's argument against invoking the extended period of limitation. The Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit 25% of the duty demanded within eight weeks, considering the company's financial condition. Compliance was required by a specified date, aiming to balance duty enforcement and financial constraints. The decision emphasized the importance of paying duty on the correct transaction value and addressing the financial challenges faced by the applicant. en-us Mon, 06 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Jun 2015 07:57:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260614 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the department, stating that duty should be paid inclusive of freight charges, rejecting the applicant's argument against invoking the extended period of limitation. The Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit 25% of the duty demanded within eight weeks, considering the company's financial condition. Compliance was required by a specified date, aiming to balance duty enforcement and financial constraints. The decision emphasized the importance of paying duty on the correct transaction value and addressing the financial challenges faced by the applicant. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260614