https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376495 In job-work valuation, royalty or technical fee paid by the principal manufacturer was not includible in the assessable value where the job worker followed the accepted cost-of-materials-plus-job-work-charges formula and had no knowledge of that payment. The department's prior awareness of the job-work arrangement, cost sheets and returns meant there was no suppression or misdeclaration, so the extended limitation period could not be invoked for the 2004-05 to 2007-08 demand. As the demand failed on merits and limitation, the associated penalties on both the job worker and the principal manufacturer also could not survive. The impugned order was set aside and the duty demand and penalties were cancelled. en-us Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Apr 2019 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376495 In job-work valuation, royalty or technical fee paid by the principal manufacturer was not includible in the assessable value where the job worker followed the accepted cost-of-materials-plus-job-work-charges formula and had no knowledge of that payment. The department's prior awareness of the job-work arrangement, cost sheets and returns meant there was no suppression or misdeclaration, so the extended limitation period could not be invoked for the 2004-05 to 2007-08 demand. As the demand failed on merits and limitation, the associated penalties on both the job worker and the principal manufacturer also could not survive. The impugned order was set aside and the duty demand and penalties were cancelled. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376495