https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186872 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, could not be invoked due to a lack of evidence of suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal found that the Revenue had prior knowledge of the relevant facts and that the appellant had disclosed necessary information. The Tribunal emphasized that mere omission does not constitute suppression unless there is a deliberate intent to evade duty. Consequently, the extended period of limitation was not applicable, and the department's appeal was rejected. en-us Thu, 20 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Mar 2024 10:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186872 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, could not be invoked due to a lack of evidence of suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal found that the Revenue had prior knowledge of the relevant facts and that the appellant had disclosed necessary information. The Tribunal emphasized that mere omission does not constitute suppression unless there is a deliberate intent to evade duty. Consequently, the extended period of limitation was not applicable, and the department's appeal was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186872