https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350268 The Tribunal ruled that the royalty amount received by the appellant should be included in the assessable value for duty calculation. Despite the lack of a direct link to the sale of goods, the appellant was held liable for duty for the normal period only, as they genuinely believed the royalty amount should not be included and did not intend to evade duty. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable. The appeal was partially allowed, with the appellant directed to pay duty for the normal period based on the amount already deposited in their CENVAT account. en-us Fri, 22 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Apr 2018 10:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350268 The Tribunal ruled that the royalty amount received by the appellant should be included in the assessable value for duty calculation. Despite the lack of a direct link to the sale of goods, the appellant was held liable for duty for the normal period only, as they genuinely believed the royalty amount should not be included and did not intend to evade duty. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable. The appeal was partially allowed, with the appellant directed to pay duty for the normal period based on the amount already deposited in their CENVAT account. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350268