https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123520 A rectification application cannot be used to reopen unchallenged concurrent findings that the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts and had not suppressed information. On that basis, the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be revived, and the proposed enhancement of penalty also failed because it rested on the same factual foundation. The Tribunal noted that any challenge to those factual findings had to be pursued by cross-appeal, not by ROM. In the absence of an apparent mistake, the rectification request was rejected. en-us Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Sep 2012 18:07:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123520 A rectification application cannot be used to reopen unchallenged concurrent findings that the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts and had not suppressed information. On that basis, the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be revived, and the proposed enhancement of penalty also failed because it rested on the same factual foundation. The Tribunal noted that any challenge to those factual findings had to be pursued by cross-appeal, not by ROM. In the absence of an apparent mistake, the rectification request was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123520