https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34066 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant, setting aside the duty demand imposed under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal emphasized that as a registered dealer not liable to duty under Section 11D, the appellant should not be held accountable for the excess sales price. They concluded that the levy on the appellant was unsustainable, highlighting the importance of accurately interpreting legal provisions to ensure appropriate application in cases involving duty demands on registered dealers. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34066 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant, setting aside the duty demand imposed under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal emphasized that as a registered dealer not liable to duty under Section 11D, the appellant should not be held accountable for the excess sales price. They concluded that the levy on the appellant was unsustainable, highlighting the importance of accurately interpreting legal provisions to ensure appropriate application in cases involving duty demands on registered dealers. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34066