https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752723 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that excise duty demand on goods cleared from clinker unit to grinding unit was time-barred. The case involved valuation dispute whether duty should be calculated at 110% of production cost under Rule 8 or transaction value under Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Since both units later obtained common registration and situation was revenue neutral with no malafide intention, extended limitation period could not be invoked. Show cause notice issued March 2016 for March 2011-November 2013 period exceeded normal limitation. Appeal allowed on limitation grounds without examining merits. en-us Tue, 14 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 May 2024 08:26:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752723 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that excise duty demand on goods cleared from clinker unit to grinding unit was time-barred. The case involved valuation dispute whether duty should be calculated at 110% of production cost under Rule 8 or transaction value under Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Since both units later obtained common registration and situation was revenue neutral with no malafide intention, extended limitation period could not be invoked. Show cause notice issued March 2016 for March 2011-November 2013 period exceeded normal limitation. Appeal allowed on limitation grounds without examining merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752723