https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75146 Extended limitation under Section 11A remains available where the department had only initial or partial awareness and was still ascertaining material facts such as quantity, valuation and confirmation; the demand was therefore not time-barred. Penalty proceedings under Rule 173Q are not invalid merely because the precise sub-clause is omitted if the notice clearly communicates the contraventions. A bona fide-belief defence fails where contractual terms require duty compliance, no meaningful enquiry was made, and similar goods were treated as excisable. Natural justice is not breached without a request for joint hearing or demonstrated prejudice. The demand and penalty were upheld. en-us Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75146 Extended limitation under Section 11A remains available where the department had only initial or partial awareness and was still ascertaining material facts such as quantity, valuation and confirmation; the demand was therefore not time-barred. Penalty proceedings under Rule 173Q are not invalid merely because the precise sub-clause is omitted if the notice clearly communicates the contraventions. A bona fide-belief defence fails where contractual terms require duty compliance, no meaningful enquiry was made, and similar goods were treated as excisable. Natural justice is not breached without a request for joint hearing or demonstrated prejudice. The demand and penalty were upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75146