https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263426 The text explains that differential duty demand was treated as time-barred because the assessee had corresponded with the jurisdictional Superintendent and disclosed the variation between the commercial invoice price and the assessable value, including the deductions and the method used to compute assessable value. On that record, there was no deliberate suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, so the extended period of limitation was unavailable. As the show cause notice was issued beyond the relevant period despite departmental awareness of the material facts, the demand was set aside as barred by limitation. en-us Thu, 06 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Sep 2015 07:48:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263426 The text explains that differential duty demand was treated as time-barred because the assessee had corresponded with the jurisdictional Superintendent and disclosed the variation between the commercial invoice price and the assessable value, including the deductions and the method used to compute assessable value. On that record, there was no deliberate suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, so the extended period of limitation was unavailable. As the show cause notice was issued beyond the relevant period despite departmental awareness of the material facts, the demand was set aside as barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263426