https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166728 Clearances of steel plant by-products made openly and with departmental knowledge did not justify recovery as a contravention-based excise demand, because the record showed no secrecy, deception, or mala fide intent to evade duty. The Tribunal also applied the special limitation provision in Rule 173PP(10), under which the demand had to be issued within the stipulated period from the close of the accounting year. As the notice was issued after that period, the demand was barred by limitation and could not be sustained; the appeal was allowed and the lower order was set aside. en-us Sat, 29 Oct 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Nov 2014 16:28:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166728 Clearances of steel plant by-products made openly and with departmental knowledge did not justify recovery as a contravention-based excise demand, because the record showed no secrecy, deception, or mala fide intent to evade duty. The Tribunal also applied the special limitation provision in Rule 173PP(10), under which the demand had to be issued within the stipulated period from the close of the accounting year. As the notice was issued after that period, the demand was barred by limitation and could not be sustained; the appeal was allowed and the lower order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 29 Oct 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166728