https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210363 The extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the record did not show fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts by the assessee. The show cause notice was issued long after the departmental inspection had already disclosed the alleged discrepancy, and the stock-register error was treated as an admitted mistake in maintenance of records. On those facts, the duty demand was time-barred and could not be sustained on limitation, with the assessee succeeding and the High Court's decision affirmed. en-us Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 12:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210363 The extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the record did not show fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts by the assessee. The show cause notice was issued long after the departmental inspection had already disclosed the alleged discrepancy, and the stock-register error was treated as an admitted mistake in maintenance of records. On those facts, the duty demand was time-barred and could not be sustained on limitation, with the assessee succeeding and the High Court's decision affirmed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210363