https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74738 A show cause notice seeking differential excise duty for April and May 1980 was held time-barred because it was issued after the normal limitation period under Section 11A. The assessee's non-disclosure in returns did not amount to suppression or wilful misstatement, as the Department was already aware from earlier litigation of the differential duty collection issue and the position after the Delhi High Court decision in March 1980. The retrospective amendment to Section 4(4)(d)(ii) by the Finance Act, 1982 did not override the limitation scheme under Section 11A, so the demand could not be sustained. en-us Tue, 01 Dec 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:40:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74738 A show cause notice seeking differential excise duty for April and May 1980 was held time-barred because it was issued after the normal limitation period under Section 11A. The assessee's non-disclosure in returns did not amount to suppression or wilful misstatement, as the Department was already aware from earlier litigation of the differential duty collection issue and the position after the Delhi High Court decision in March 1980. The retrospective amendment to Section 4(4)(d)(ii) by the Finance Act, 1982 did not override the limitation scheme under Section 11A, so the demand could not be sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Dec 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74738