https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359722 A binding Larger Bench interpretation of the exemption notifications governed eligibility for duty relief on goods imported or procured locally and cleared to the DTA, and the expression was read to cover zero-rated finished goods, including fully exempt, nil-rated, free-rated, and non-specified tariff goods. On that basis, the exemption claim failed. However, because the dispute arose from conflicting views later referred to the Larger Bench, the ingredients for invoking the extended period of limitation were not made out, and penalty was also unwarranted. The demands were therefore confined to the normal limitation period. en-us Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 May 2018 08:47:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359722 A binding Larger Bench interpretation of the exemption notifications governed eligibility for duty relief on goods imported or procured locally and cleared to the DTA, and the expression was read to cover zero-rated finished goods, including fully exempt, nil-rated, free-rated, and non-specified tariff goods. On that basis, the exemption claim failed. However, because the dispute arose from conflicting views later referred to the Larger Bench, the ingredients for invoking the extended period of limitation were not made out, and penalty was also unwarranted. The demands were therefore confined to the normal limitation period. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359722