https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85688 Modvat credit reversal was held time-barred because the assessee had disclosed the claim in the RT-12 return, enclosed the relevant RG 23A extracts, and produced the Superintendent's certificate showing the goods were rejected goods. As the return was scrutinised and approved by the department, the material facts were already before it, and mere failure to notice the documents could not amount to suppression. For invocation of the extended limitation period under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, a positive act of misstatement, collusion, or suppression is required; absent that, the extended period is unavailable. en-us Fri, 19 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Aug 2011 15:42:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85688 Modvat credit reversal was held time-barred because the assessee had disclosed the claim in the RT-12 return, enclosed the relevant RG 23A extracts, and produced the Superintendent's certificate showing the goods were rejected goods. As the return was scrutinised and approved by the department, the material facts were already before it, and mere failure to notice the documents could not amount to suppression. For invocation of the extended limitation period under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, a positive act of misstatement, collusion, or suppression is required; absent that, the extended period is unavailable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85688