https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51023 The appellate tribunal set aside the Commissioner's decision confirming a duty demand of Rs. 9,27,78,318/- and imposing penalties, confiscation of assets, and a fine for redemption. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, who were engaged in manufacturing and job work services, stating that the department's claim of ignorance was not valid due to their prior knowledge of the activities. The tribunal found the impugned order legally flawed and allowed the appeal, concluding that the larger period of limitation could not be invoked by the department. en-us Tue, 04 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:08:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51023 The appellate tribunal set aside the Commissioner's decision confirming a duty demand of Rs. 9,27,78,318/- and imposing penalties, confiscation of assets, and a fine for redemption. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, who were engaged in manufacturing and job work services, stating that the department's claim of ignorance was not valid due to their prior knowledge of the activities. The tribunal found the impugned order legally flawed and allowed the appeal, concluding that the larger period of limitation could not be invoked by the department. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51023