https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121578 In Modvat credit disputes, later non-production of documents during audit did not by itself establish suppression of facts where the records had been available and verified when credit was originally taken. On that basis, the extended limitation period was not justified and the demand was treated as time-barred. The document also notes that where excess credit was taken inadvertently, reversal of credit with interest could be maintained without necessarily attracting penalty, particularly when the substantive reversal was not disputed. The overall effect is that limitation depends on actual suppression at the relevant time, while penalty requires a separate factual basis beyond an inadvertent credit error. en-us Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:25:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121578 In Modvat credit disputes, later non-production of documents during audit did not by itself establish suppression of facts where the records had been available and verified when credit was originally taken. On that basis, the extended limitation period was not justified and the demand was treated as time-barred. The document also notes that where excess credit was taken inadvertently, reversal of credit with interest could be maintained without necessarily attracting penalty, particularly when the substantive reversal was not disputed. The overall effect is that limitation depends on actual suppression at the relevant time, while penalty requires a separate factual basis beyond an inadvertent credit error. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121578