https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123883 A demand was held time-barred where the records showed the relevant facts and there was no suppression to justify the extended limitation period. The show cause notice also failed to support the longer period, so the notice issued beyond the normal period could not be sustained. Findings on irregular Cenvat credit were likewise rejected because the appellate reasoning travelled beyond the notice: the notice alleged wrongful credit on vehicles returned after testing, but the later finding rested on a different characterisation of the goods as worn-out parts and junk. The order confirming the demand was set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 15:49:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123883 A demand was held time-barred where the records showed the relevant facts and there was no suppression to justify the extended limitation period. The show cause notice also failed to support the longer period, so the notice issued beyond the normal period could not be sustained. Findings on irregular Cenvat credit were likewise rejected because the appellate reasoning travelled beyond the notice: the notice alleged wrongful credit on vehicles returned after testing, but the later finding rested on a different characterisation of the goods as worn-out parts and junk. The order confirming the demand was set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123883