https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3546 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act could not be invoked where the assessee had filed statutory declarations and RT-42 returns, used the correct valuation provision, and the dispute arose only from an arithmetical error in raw material cost. Because the clearances were consumed within the assessee's own units and any duty paid would be available as Modvat credit, the matter was revenue neutral. In the absence of suppression of facts or intent to evade duty, the differential duty demand based on the valuation mistake was unsustainable. en-us Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3546 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act could not be invoked where the assessee had filed statutory declarations and RT-42 returns, used the correct valuation provision, and the dispute arose only from an arithmetical error in raw material cost. Because the clearances were consumed within the assessee's own units and any duty paid would be available as Modvat credit, the matter was revenue neutral. In the absence of suppression of facts or intent to evade duty, the differential duty demand based on the valuation mistake was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3546