https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112269 Limitation under Section 11A governed recovery of short-paid central excise duty where no suppression, fraud or collusion was alleged, so the department had to issue notice within six months from the relevant date. For periodical returns, the relevant date was the filing date or the last due date for filing. Applying that rule, two notices were within time, but the notice dated 13-1-2000 was time-barred for the quarter from 1-4-1999 to 30-6-1999. That demand was set aside, while the remaining demand was sustained. en-us Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Apr 2012 13:35:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112269 Limitation under Section 11A governed recovery of short-paid central excise duty where no suppression, fraud or collusion was alleged, so the department had to issue notice within six months from the relevant date. For periodical returns, the relevant date was the filing date or the last due date for filing. Applying that rule, two notices were within time, but the notice dated 13-1-2000 was time-barred for the quarter from 1-4-1999 to 30-6-1999. That demand was set aside, while the remaining demand was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112269