https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339724 Differential duty for January 1998 was held time-barred because the department was already informed of the revised annual capacity and intended duty payment from 1-1-1998, and the monthly RT-12 returns disclosed payment on that revised basis. On those facts, no suppression of facts could be attributed to the assessee, so the extended limitation period was unavailable. As the show cause notice was issued beyond the then-applicable six-month normal period, the demand was treated as unsustainable. en-us Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Mar 2017 12:09:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339724 Differential duty for January 1998 was held time-barred because the department was already informed of the revised annual capacity and intended duty payment from 1-1-1998, and the monthly RT-12 returns disclosed payment on that revised basis. On those facts, no suppression of facts could be attributed to the assessee, so the extended limitation period was unavailable. As the show cause notice was issued beyond the then-applicable six-month normal period, the demand was treated as unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339724