https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207604 The Tribunal held that the demand of duty beyond the period of limitation cannot be confirmed as the extended period of limitation was not applicable due to the lack of fraud, collusion, or willful misstatement. It was determined that the certificates issued by the project implementing authority were valid at the time of clearance, and their subsequent cancellation should not have a retrospective effect. The Tribunal concluded that despite revenue-neutrality, recovery of short-levied duty within the limitation period is permissible under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The demand and penalty were set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-quantification within the limitation period. en-us Mon, 19 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 May 2015 18:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207604 The Tribunal held that the demand of duty beyond the period of limitation cannot be confirmed as the extended period of limitation was not applicable due to the lack of fraud, collusion, or willful misstatement. It was determined that the certificates issued by the project implementing authority were valid at the time of clearance, and their subsequent cancellation should not have a retrospective effect. The Tribunal concluded that despite revenue-neutrality, recovery of short-levied duty within the limitation period is permissible under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The demand and penalty were set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-quantification within the limitation period. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207604