https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82540 Extended limitation for duty and penalty under Modvat was not justified where the assessee had already corresponded with the department on reversal of credit attributable to inputs used in exempted products, and the department had accepted the working shown in RG-23A debits and monthly returns. On those facts, the omission to specify the description of dutiable and exempted final products in the Rule 57G declaration did not amount to suppression or misstatement. The manufacture pattern also varied from month to month, weakening any allegation of deliberate non-disclosure. The demand was therefore held time-barred and the duty and penalty were set aside. en-us Tue, 20 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jul 2011 17:31:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82540 Extended limitation for duty and penalty under Modvat was not justified where the assessee had already corresponded with the department on reversal of credit attributable to inputs used in exempted products, and the department had accepted the working shown in RG-23A debits and monthly returns. On those facts, the omission to specify the description of dutiable and exempted final products in the Rule 57G declaration did not amount to suppression or misstatement. The manufacture pattern also varied from month to month, weakening any allegation of deliberate non-disclosure. The demand was therefore held time-barred and the duty and penalty were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82540