https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106888 The extended period of limitation could not be invoked where the units had previously been licensed, later de-licensed at the Department's instance, and had already undergone licensing scrutiny. With the ship-breaking issue then pending before the Gujarat High Court and the Board's clarification treating market-purchased inputs, whether old or new, as duty paid for Notification No. 208/83-C.E., the Department could not establish suppression with intent to evade duty. As the goods used were a mixed lot and the notification itself assumed market inputs were duty paid, the duty demand was barred by limitation. en-us Thu, 17 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2012 11:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106888 The extended period of limitation could not be invoked where the units had previously been licensed, later de-licensed at the Department's instance, and had already undergone licensing scrutiny. With the ship-breaking issue then pending before the Gujarat High Court and the Board's clarification treating market-purchased inputs, whether old or new, as duty paid for Notification No. 208/83-C.E., the Department could not establish suppression with intent to evade duty. As the goods used were a mixed lot and the notification itself assumed market inputs were duty paid, the duty demand was barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 17 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106888