https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87743 CESTAT adjudicated a dispute concerning classification and excise duty for palm stearin products. The tribunal determined that the appellant's classification was bona fide, based on prior circular and supported by documented manufacturing processes. The department failed to establish fraudulent intent in duty non-payment. The extended limitation period under Section 11A could not be invoked absent evidence of deliberate evasion. Critically, the show cause notice issued beyond the standard one-year limitation was deemed invalid. Precedential cases from Mumbai and Ahmedabad benches supported the appellant's position. The tribunal ultimately allowed the appeal, negating the duty demands and rejecting the extended limitation period application. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:57 +0530 Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87743 CESTAT adjudicated a dispute concerning classification and excise duty for palm stearin products. The tribunal determined that the appellant's classification was bona fide, based on prior circular and supported by documented manufacturing processes. The department failed to establish fraudulent intent in duty non-payment. The extended limitation period under Section 11A could not be invoked absent evidence of deliberate evasion. Critically, the show cause notice issued beyond the standard one-year limitation was deemed invalid. Precedential cases from Mumbai and Ahmedabad benches supported the appellant's position. The tribunal ultimately allowed the appeal, negating the duty demands and rejecting the extended limitation period application. Highlights Central Excise Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87743