https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332522 Where Modvat credit was availed on items disclosed in RT-12 returns and RG-23 records, suppression could not be inferred merely because the items were later found not to be inputs. The Tribunal held that the assessee's contemporaneous disclosures and the record of its own admissions showed no undisclosed conduct justifying the extended period of limitation. Reliance on export under bond and alleged revenue neutrality did not cure the incorrect availment, but those factors also did not establish suppression on the facts. The extended period was therefore not invocable, and the assessee succeeded on limitation. en-us Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2016 14:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332522 Where Modvat credit was availed on items disclosed in RT-12 returns and RG-23 records, suppression could not be inferred merely because the items were later found not to be inputs. The Tribunal held that the assessee's contemporaneous disclosures and the record of its own admissions showed no undisclosed conduct justifying the extended period of limitation. Reliance on export under bond and alleged revenue neutrality did not cure the incorrect availment, but those factors also did not establish suppression on the facts. The extended period was therefore not invocable, and the assessee succeeded on limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332522