https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377564 The Tribunal determined that the transaction value for excise duty purposes should be the rate contract price with government agencies, not the price charged to distributors. Section 11D of the Central Excise Act was found inapplicable as excess amounts collected were not considered excise duty. The extended period for demand and penalty invocation was upheld due to distributor transactions being revealed later. Demand computation errors led to remanding the matter for recalculation. The personal penalty on the director was overturned due to lack of evidence of direct involvement in duty short payment. en-us Tue, 12 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Apr 2019 07:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377564 The Tribunal determined that the transaction value for excise duty purposes should be the rate contract price with government agencies, not the price charged to distributors. Section 11D of the Central Excise Act was found inapplicable as excess amounts collected were not considered excise duty. The extended period for demand and penalty invocation was upheld due to distributor transactions being revealed later. Demand computation errors led to remanding the matter for recalculation. The personal penalty on the director was overturned due to lack of evidence of direct involvement in duty short payment. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377564