https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91474 Extended limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act cannot rest on alleged suppression where the Department already knew the relevant manufacturing and branding facts. Departmental correspondence directing the manufacturer to obtain a Central Excise licence, comply with procedure and pay duty established prior awareness of ice cream manufactured and sold under the 'Kwality' brand. Suppression with intent to evade duty was therefore not established, and a demand issued beyond the normal limitation period was time-barred. The substantive exemption dispute was not examined because limitation disposed of the matter. en-us Thu, 10 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:36:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91474 Extended limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act cannot rest on alleged suppression where the Department already knew the relevant manufacturing and branding facts. Departmental correspondence directing the manufacturer to obtain a Central Excise licence, comply with procedure and pay duty established prior awareness of ice cream manufactured and sold under the 'Kwality' brand. Suppression with intent to evade duty was therefore not established, and a demand issued beyond the normal limitation period was time-barred. The substantive exemption dispute was not examined because limitation disposed of the matter. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91474