https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53071 In job-work central excise valuation, manufacturing-related overheads forming part of the cost of production were held includible in assessable value, so the disputed "other works overhead" had to be added. The omission of that cost element from the valuation was treated as suppression of material facts, which justified invocation of the extended period of limitation and penalty under Section 11AC. However, once penalty was sustained under Section 11AC, the separate penalty under Rule 173Q was found unnecessary and was set aside. The demand on valuation and the extended period therefore survived, while the overlapping additional penalty did not. en-us Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Oct 2010 14:26:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53071 In job-work central excise valuation, manufacturing-related overheads forming part of the cost of production were held includible in assessable value, so the disputed "other works overhead" had to be added. The omission of that cost element from the valuation was treated as suppression of material facts, which justified invocation of the extended period of limitation and penalty under Section 11AC. However, once penalty was sustained under Section 11AC, the separate penalty under Rule 173Q was found unnecessary and was set aside. The demand on valuation and the extended period therefore survived, while the overlapping additional penalty did not. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53071