https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267001 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The tribunal held that the demand was barred by limitation as the department failed to prove fraud or suppression with the intent to evade duty payment. It was emphasized that the department should have acted promptly upon discovering the wrongful credit availment, and the extended limitation period was deemed inapplicable in this instance. en-us Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 06:36:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267001 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The tribunal held that the demand was barred by limitation as the department failed to prove fraud or suppression with the intent to evade duty payment. It was emphasized that the department should have acted promptly upon discovering the wrongful credit availment, and the extended limitation period was deemed inapplicable in this instance. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267001