https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183117 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand beyond one year and the penalty imposed on the appellants. It held that the extended period could not be invoked due to contradictory views on the issue despite a Board Circular, emphasizing that circulars were not binding when different interpretations were possible. The matter was remanded for calculating the duty demand within the limitation period. The Tribunal ruled that the demand was time-barred, following a precedent in a similar case, and overturned the impugned order, disposing of the stay petition and appeal accordingly. en-us Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 May 2016 12:05:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183117 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand beyond one year and the penalty imposed on the appellants. It held that the extended period could not be invoked due to contradictory views on the issue despite a Board Circular, emphasizing that circulars were not binding when different interpretations were possible. The matter was remanded for calculating the duty demand within the limitation period. The Tribunal ruled that the demand was time-barred, following a precedent in a similar case, and overturned the impugned order, disposing of the stay petition and appeal accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183117