https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188072 Extended limitation could not be invoked for the disputed clearances because the Tribunal accepted the assessees' bona fide belief and confined recovery to the normal six-month period. The exemption under Notification No. 64/95-C.E. was already found inapplicable, but the excess demand beyond limitation was barred. For the small portion surviving within limitation in one matter, the original authority was directed to quantify the duty after adjusting the 8% amount already deposited under Rule 57CC. As the time-barred demand could not stand, the penalties on the manufacturers and other appellants were also set aside. en-us Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:12:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188072 Extended limitation could not be invoked for the disputed clearances because the Tribunal accepted the assessees' bona fide belief and confined recovery to the normal six-month period. The exemption under Notification No. 64/95-C.E. was already found inapplicable, but the excess demand beyond limitation was barred. For the small portion surviving within limitation in one matter, the original authority was directed to quantify the duty after adjusting the 8% amount already deposited under Rule 57CC. As the time-barred demand could not stand, the penalties on the manufacturers and other appellants were also set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188072