https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51358 Extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) was treated as available where classification records and the director's contemporaneous statement showed ambiguous disclosure of brand ownership, knowledge of foreign collaborator ownership, and deliberate suppression with intent to evade duty. The cum-duty price claim was not decided on merits because the assessable value question required factual examination at the adjudication stage, so it was remitted for fresh determination. The penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside because no reasoned finding or supporting basis had been recorded. The demand was sustained on limitation, valuation was reopened, and the penalty was annulled. en-us Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:00:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51358 Extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) was treated as available where classification records and the director's contemporaneous statement showed ambiguous disclosure of brand ownership, knowledge of foreign collaborator ownership, and deliberate suppression with intent to evade duty. The cum-duty price claim was not decided on merits because the assessable value question required factual examination at the adjudication stage, so it was remitted for fresh determination. The penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside because no reasoned finding or supporting basis had been recorded. The demand was sustained on limitation, valuation was reopened, and the penalty was annulled. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51358