https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83417 Omission of stainless steel from a Modvat declaration did not, by itself, establish misstatement or suppression where the input, process, and final product had been disclosed and the department had accepted the later declaration. On those facts, denial of credit and invocation of the extended limitation period were not justified. A separate grievance that the appeal was heard before expiry of time to file cross-objection raised no referable legal question, because the matter was taken up for final hearing with the Departmental Representative's consent. The application for reference therefore failed because no question of law was made out. en-us Wed, 17 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:54:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83417 Omission of stainless steel from a Modvat declaration did not, by itself, establish misstatement or suppression where the input, process, and final product had been disclosed and the department had accepted the later declaration. On those facts, denial of credit and invocation of the extended limitation period were not justified. A separate grievance that the appeal was heard before expiry of time to file cross-objection raised no referable legal question, because the matter was taken up for final hearing with the Departmental Representative's consent. The application for reference therefore failed because no question of law was made out. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83417