Extended period of limitation unavailable absent suppression and wilful intent in excise clearances supported by proper documents.

Duty-paid inputs cleared under prescribed excise procedure, supported by classification lists, RT-12 returns and duty-paying documents, did not show clandestine removal or misdeclaration. On those facts, the Tribunal noted that no suppression of facts with wilful intent was established, so the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal limitation period, the demand was treated as time-barred and the related penalty could not survive.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand and penalty were barred by limitation and whether the extended period could be invoked on the ground of suppression of facts with wilful intent.

Analysis: The inputs were received on duty, the clearances were made under the prescribed excise procedure with classification lists, RT-12 returns and duty-paying documents, and there was no clandestine removal or misdeclaration. The duty paid on the inputs exceeded the credit taken, so no revenue loss was shown. On these facts, the Tribunal found no suppression of facts with wilful intent and held that the extended period was unavailable. Since the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period, the demand was barred by limitation.

Conclusion: The demand was time-barred and the penalty could not survive; the appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duty-paid inputs are cleared on proper documents after compliance with excise procedure and there is no suppression of facts with wilful intent, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked.

---