TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the demand was barred by limitation on the ground that the extended period could not be invoked, and whether the consequent penalties could survive.
Analysis: The material facts showed that the department had knowledge of the assessee's crossing of the SSI exemption limit after the search and scrutiny conducted on 10.06.2006, yet no effective action was taken within the normal period. The Court treated this prior departmental knowledge as fatal to the allegation of suppression with intent to evade duty. In the absence of a valid basis for invoking the extended period, the demand could not be sustained, and the penalties, being consequential to the demand, also could not stand.
Conclusion: The extended period of limitation was not invokable, the duty demand was time-barred, and the penalties were unsustainable; the appeals were allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
