https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109502 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because gate passes did not show input part numbers, or because the numbers did not match the Rule 57G declaration, where the rule did not require such particulars and the inputs were otherwise linked to the declared final products. Non-submission of duty-paying documents with RT 12 returns did not, on these facts, amount to suppression justifying the extended limitation period, because the department was aware of the omission and had not acted for the earlier period. The demand was therefore time-barred, and the penalty could not survive. en-us Wed, 14 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:07:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109502 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because gate passes did not show input part numbers, or because the numbers did not match the Rule 57G declaration, where the rule did not require such particulars and the inputs were otherwise linked to the declared final products. Non-submission of duty-paying documents with RT 12 returns did not, on these facts, amount to suppression justifying the extended limitation period, because the department was aware of the omission and had not acted for the earlier period. The demand was therefore time-barred, and the penalty could not survive. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109502