https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94094 Disclosure of disputed charges in invoices enclosed with RT-12 returns was treated as sufficient notice to the jurisdictional officer, so the allegation of suppression of material facts could not be sustained. In the absence of suppression, the extended limitation period under section 11A(1) was unavailable, and the central excise duty demand was time-barred. en-us Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Nov 2011 11:03:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94094 Disclosure of disputed charges in invoices enclosed with RT-12 returns was treated as sufficient notice to the jurisdictional officer, so the allegation of suppression of material facts could not be sustained. In the absence of suppression, the extended limitation period under section 11A(1) was unavailable, and the central excise duty demand was time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94094