https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85836 A duty demand could not be sustained beyond the normal limitation period under Section 11A because the show cause notices covered a period earlier than six months and did not allege suppression of material facts or otherwise invoke the extended period. In the absence of the necessary factual allegations in the notices, the longer limitation period was unavailable, so the demand was held time-barred. The valuation dispute was not examined on merits because limitation was ative and the appeal was allowed. en-us Fri, 27 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2011 13:41:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85836 A duty demand could not be sustained beyond the normal limitation period under Section 11A because the show cause notices covered a period earlier than six months and did not allege suppression of material facts or otherwise invoke the extended period. In the absence of the necessary factual allegations in the notices, the longer limitation period was unavailable, so the demand was held time-barred. The valuation dispute was not examined on merits because limitation was ative and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85836