https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113023 Extended limitation was treated as invocable where the conversion of PVA powder into PVA solution was not disclosed, the omission being regarded as suppression of facts. The revenue-neutrality defence was rejected because the alleged credit advantage was not shown to accrue to the assessee in the required manner. The article also notes that a manufacturer may claim full exemption for one class of goods while paying concessional duty on another, and where aggregate clearances remain within the prescribed threshold, the exemption can still apply to the Chapter 39 product. en-us Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 May 2012 13:55:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113023 Extended limitation was treated as invocable where the conversion of PVA powder into PVA solution was not disclosed, the omission being regarded as suppression of facts. The revenue-neutrality defence was rejected because the alleged credit advantage was not shown to accrue to the assessee in the required manner. The article also notes that a manufacturer may claim full exemption for one class of goods while paying concessional duty on another, and where aggregate clearances remain within the prescribed threshold, the exemption can still apply to the Chapter 39 product. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113023