https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288105 Duty demand on steel structures fabricated on job-work basis was found unsustainable because the record showed a separate registered unit, multiple job-workers, and supply of raw materials by the coloniser, while the adjudicating authority relied only on conjecture and incomplete enquiry. The extended limitation period was also rejected because suppression with intent to evade was not proved, the relevant period was not clearly stated, and the notification cited was not in force for that period. Penalty on the partner under Rule 209A failed because there was no finding that he dealt with excisable goods knowing or having reason to believe they were liable to confiscation. en-us Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2020 13:04:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288105 Duty demand on steel structures fabricated on job-work basis was found unsustainable because the record showed a separate registered unit, multiple job-workers, and supply of raw materials by the coloniser, while the adjudicating authority relied only on conjecture and incomplete enquiry. The extended limitation period was also rejected because suppression with intent to evade was not proved, the relevant period was not clearly stated, and the notification cited was not in force for that period. Penalty on the partner under Rule 209A failed because there was no finding that he dealt with excisable goods knowing or having reason to believe they were liable to confiscation. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288105