https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153651 The Tribunal found that the demand under the second notice for the period from April, 2004 to November, 2004 was not sustainable as there was no suppression of facts by the Appellant. Relying on the decision in Nizam Sugar Factory case, the Tribunal allowed the Appeal, setting aside the impugned Order and granting consequential benefits to the Appellant as per the law. en-us Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:53:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153651 The Tribunal found that the demand under the second notice for the period from April, 2004 to November, 2004 was not sustainable as there was no suppression of facts by the Appellant. Relying on the decision in Nizam Sugar Factory case, the Tribunal allowed the Appeal, setting aside the impugned Order and granting consequential benefits to the Appellant as per the law. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153651