https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80013 Extended limitation for central excise duty could not be invoked without proof of suppression of facts or clandestine removal with intent to evade duty. The record showed disclosure of the strip mill activity in departmental correspondence, departmental awareness of the manufacturing activity, and movement of goods under an accounted transport system, while independent evidence of clandestine removal was absent. Penalty under the excise penalty provision was also unsustainable because the conduct, at most, amounted to a technical breach arising from a bona fide misunderstanding of excisability. The duty demand and penalty were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 21 Nov 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:16:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80013 Extended limitation for central excise duty could not be invoked without proof of suppression of facts or clandestine removal with intent to evade duty. The record showed disclosure of the strip mill activity in departmental correspondence, departmental awareness of the manufacturing activity, and movement of goods under an accounted transport system, while independent evidence of clandestine removal was absent. Penalty under the excise penalty provision was also unsustainable because the conduct, at most, amounted to a technical breach arising from a bona fide misunderstanding of excisability. The duty demand and penalty were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Nov 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80013