https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173633 Customer-supplied moulds used in manufacture were held to have their proportionate cost included in the assessable value of the finished goods, and amortization had to be computed on the basis of the number of goods capable of being produced from the moulds rather than actual removals. However, suppression of facts was not established because statutory records, contractual terms, classification, and price particulars were disclosed and the department had approved them; the extended period of limitation was therefore unavailable. On the same footing, penalty under Section 11AC, penalty under Rule 173Q, and interest under Section 11AB were not leviable. The duty demand on merits was sustained, but the extended-period demand and consequential penal and interest demands were set aside. en-us Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:37:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173633 Customer-supplied moulds used in manufacture were held to have their proportionate cost included in the assessable value of the finished goods, and amortization had to be computed on the basis of the number of goods capable of being produced from the moulds rather than actual removals. However, suppression of facts was not established because statutory records, contractual terms, classification, and price particulars were disclosed and the department had approved them; the extended period of limitation was therefore unavailable. On the same footing, penalty under Section 11AC, penalty under Rule 173Q, and interest under Section 11AB were not leviable. The duty demand on merits was sustained, but the extended-period demand and consequential penal and interest demands were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173633