Court :
Supreme Court
Brief :
The Hon’ble Apex Court held that even though the goods were found to be different, payment of duty taking comparative value was done with bona fide belief. When entire exercise was revenue neutral (i.e. credit of duty paid on captive consumption was available to the Appellant itself), the Appellant could not have achieved any purpose to evade duty. Hence, extended period of limitation and consequent demand was set aside.
Citation :
Nirlon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [(2015) 58 taxmann.com 28 (SC)]
Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access
Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English