https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54508 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding no wilful suppression of facts to evade duty and determining that the extended period for demand was not applicable. The appellants were not entitled to exemption under Notification No. 8/96-C.E. due to processing activities in their factory. Fabrics with shrinkage of 1.5% or less were held liable for duty. The Tribunal remanded the issue of duty payment for fabrics used in export garments to the jurisdictional Commissioner. Penalties were deemed unjustified, and interest liability was contingent on the final duty quantification. en-us Wed, 31 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:45:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54508 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding no wilful suppression of facts to evade duty and determining that the extended period for demand was not applicable. The appellants were not entitled to exemption under Notification No. 8/96-C.E. due to processing activities in their factory. Fabrics with shrinkage of 1.5% or less were held liable for duty. The Tribunal remanded the issue of duty payment for fabrics used in export garments to the jurisdictional Commissioner. Penalties were deemed unjustified, and interest liability was contingent on the final duty quantification. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54508