https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112942 Duty demand was found time-barred because the assessee had periodically disclosed the credit entries, invoices and cross-utilisation details through the RG 23A Part-II register and monthly invoice submissions for defacement. On those facts, the Tribunal held that the department was already aware of the relevant transactions, so the extended limitation period could not be invoked on an allegation of suppression with intent to evade duty. The demand, interest and penalty were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 May 2012 17:30:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112942 Duty demand was found time-barred because the assessee had periodically disclosed the credit entries, invoices and cross-utilisation details through the RG 23A Part-II register and monthly invoice submissions for defacement. On those facts, the Tribunal held that the department was already aware of the relevant transactions, so the extended limitation period could not be invoked on an allegation of suppression with intent to evade duty. The demand, interest and penalty were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112942