https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102164 When duty liability is examined under the correct exemption notification, the demand must be confined to the normal limitation period unless the record supports the extended period; here, the larger period was not sustained. Proforma credit under Rule 56A was held available once the applicable notification was considered, subject to the assessee producing supporting documentary evidence, and it could not be denied merely because a licence had not been taken earlier. Penalty under Rule 173Q was not justified where the demand was restricted and the non-payment appeared to arise from bona fide belief; the penalty was deleted. en-us Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:14:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102164 When duty liability is examined under the correct exemption notification, the demand must be confined to the normal limitation period unless the record supports the extended period; here, the larger period was not sustained. Proforma credit under Rule 56A was held available once the applicable notification was considered, subject to the assessee producing supporting documentary evidence, and it could not be denied merely because a licence had not been taken earlier. Penalty under Rule 173Q was not justified where the demand was restricted and the non-payment appeared to arise from bona fide belief; the penalty was deleted. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102164