https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50780 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the fabrication activity did not amount to manufacture. As a result, the demand for duty under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act was deemed time-barred, leading to no penalty imposition. The decision was based on the appellant's genuine belief and the absence of facts suppression, ultimately setting aside the impugned order solely on the limitation aspect without addressing the case's merits. en-us Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:20:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50780 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the fabrication activity did not amount to manufacture. As a result, the demand for duty under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act was deemed time-barred, leading to no penalty imposition. The decision was based on the appellant's genuine belief and the absence of facts suppression, ultimately setting aside the impugned order solely on the limitation aspect without addressing the case's merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50780