https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91474 The note addresses limitation for an excise duty demand under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the availability of the extended period on the basis of suppression. It states that the Department's contemporaneous letter requiring the assessees to obtain registration, follow the prescribed procedure, and pay duty showed prior knowledge of the manufacture and sale of ice cream under the brand name "Kwality". On that footing, suppression of material facts with intent to evade duty was not made out, and the demand was treated as time-barred. The substantive exemption dispute was not examined. 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 The note addresses limitation for an excise duty demand under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the availability of the extended period on the basis of suppression. It states that the Department's contemporaneous letter requiring the assessees to obtain registration, follow the prescribed procedure, and pay duty showed prior knowledge of the manufacture and sale of ice cream under the brand name "Kwality". On that footing, suppression of material facts with intent to evade duty was not made out, and the demand was treated as time-barred. The substantive exemption dispute was not examined. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91474