https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72179 Extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was treated as available only where fraud or suppression with intent to evade duty was shown. On the facts discussed, the appellant's purchase and shifting of powerlooms on the belief that the textile permit was genuine, together with prior permission from excise authorities to shift without objection, negatived conscious suppression. The substituted show cause notice dated 9-5-1980 was treated as the operative notice, so recovery was confined to the lawful six-month period preceding it. The commentary states that the larger demand could not survive beyond that period. en-us Tue, 14 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 May 2011 10:39:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72179 Extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was treated as available only where fraud or suppression with intent to evade duty was shown. On the facts discussed, the appellant's purchase and shifting of powerlooms on the belief that the textile permit was genuine, together with prior permission from excise authorities to shift without objection, negatived conscious suppression. The substituted show cause notice dated 9-5-1980 was treated as the operative notice, so recovery was confined to the lawful six-month period preceding it. The commentary states that the larger demand could not survive beyond that period. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72179