https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95785 Central excise duty demand was considered time-barred because the assessee had disclosed the manufacture and clearance of cement articles for railway supply, and the record showed no suppression, misstatement, fraud, or collusion to justify the extended limitation period. The goods were also held eligible for exemption under Notification No. 59/90 because they were manufactured at a site allotted by the railway authorities for railway work, and the railways had informed the excise department about that allotment. On that basis, the demand, penalty, and related liability were stated to be unsustainable. en-us Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:47:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95785 Central excise duty demand was considered time-barred because the assessee had disclosed the manufacture and clearance of cement articles for railway supply, and the record showed no suppression, misstatement, fraud, or collusion to justify the extended limitation period. The goods were also held eligible for exemption under Notification No. 59/90 because they were manufactured at a site allotted by the railway authorities for railway work, and the railways had informed the excise department about that allotment. On that basis, the demand, penalty, and related liability were stated to be unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95785