https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377678 The appellant, involved in manufacturing medicaments, contested the duty payment method for physician samples. The department argued for duty payment on the pro-rata value of trade packs. The appellant claimed the demand was time-barred due to conflicting circular interpretations. The Tribunal, focusing on the limitation aspect, found the demand for the period in question time-barred. The conflicting views on circulars indicated unsettled matters, leading to the appeal's success. The judgment underscores the importance of legal clarity, circular significance, and conflicting views' impact on demand limitation periods. en-us Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Apr 2019 07:28:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377678 The appellant, involved in manufacturing medicaments, contested the duty payment method for physician samples. The department argued for duty payment on the pro-rata value of trade packs. The appellant claimed the demand was time-barred due to conflicting circular interpretations. The Tribunal, focusing on the limitation aspect, found the demand for the period in question time-barred. The conflicting views on circulars indicated unsettled matters, leading to the appeal's success. The judgment underscores the importance of legal clarity, circular significance, and conflicting views' impact on demand limitation periods. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377678