https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235218 Differential duty demand could not be sustained where the duty paid on intermediate clearances was available as credit to the recipient units, making the situation revenue neutral. In the absence of any material showing intent to evade duty, the majority held that the extended period of limitation was not justified. As the demand was founded on the extended period, it failed in full and the impugned order could not stand. The order was set aside and relief followed. en-us Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 May 2015 17:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235218 Differential duty demand could not be sustained where the duty paid on intermediate clearances was available as credit to the recipient units, making the situation revenue neutral. In the absence of any material showing intent to evade duty, the majority held that the extended period of limitation was not justified. As the demand was founded on the extended period, it failed in full and the impugned order could not stand. The order was set aside and relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235218