https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85493 Disclosure in the Modvat declaration that the goods were intended for indirect use could not be treated as suppression or a misleading statement, because the department was already on notice of the claim. The extended period of limitation was therefore unavailable, and the demand for denial of Modvat credit was barred by limitation. en-us Tue, 11 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Aug 2011 13:06:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85493 Disclosure in the Modvat declaration that the goods were intended for indirect use could not be treated as suppression or a misleading statement, because the department was already on notice of the claim. The extended period of limitation was therefore unavailable, and the demand for denial of Modvat credit was barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85493