https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762138 The Tribunal concluded that the demand for the extended period of limitation was unjustified due to the absence of suppression or misdeclaration by the appellant. It modified the impugned order by setting aside the demand for the extended period while upholding the demand for the normal period with interest. No penalty was imposed, as the issue revolved around the interpretation of the valuation rules rather than willful non-compliance. The appeal was partly allowed, affirming the appellant's position regarding the valuation methodology communicated to the Department. en-us Tue, 12 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Nov 2024 08:52:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762138 The Tribunal concluded that the demand for the extended period of limitation was unjustified due to the absence of suppression or misdeclaration by the appellant. It modified the impugned order by setting aside the demand for the extended period while upholding the demand for the normal period with interest. No penalty was imposed, as the issue revolved around the interpretation of the valuation rules rather than willful non-compliance. The appeal was partly allowed, affirming the appellant's position regarding the valuation methodology communicated to the Department. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762138