https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154899 Extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) and penalty under Section 11AC were not justified where short payment arose from captive consumption valuation, the clearances were reflected in ER-1 returns, and duty was paid with interest when pointed out. The record did not show deliberate suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty, especially since the duty paid by one unit was available as Cenvat credit to the other. The demand was therefore confined to the normal limitation period, and the penalty was held unsustainable; only the demand within the normal period remained. en-us Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:08:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154899 Extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) and penalty under Section 11AC were not justified where short payment arose from captive consumption valuation, the clearances were reflected in ER-1 returns, and duty was paid with interest when pointed out. The record did not show deliberate suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty, especially since the duty paid by one unit was available as Cenvat credit to the other. The demand was therefore confined to the normal limitation period, and the penalty was held unsustainable; only the demand within the normal period remained. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154899