https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344662 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demands for interest on the differential duty paid voluntarily were time-barred as the extended period was not invoked in the show cause notices. It held that demands for interest should align with the limitation period for the principal amount. The Tribunal also concluded that penalties proposed without valid demands were unsustainable, setting aside the Commissioner's order and allowing the appellant's appeals. The decision underscored the importance of complying with statutory timelines for demands and invoking the extended period for show cause notices. en-us Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Aug 2017 14:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344662 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demands for interest on the differential duty paid voluntarily were time-barred as the extended period was not invoked in the show cause notices. It held that demands for interest should align with the limitation period for the principal amount. The Tribunal also concluded that penalties proposed without valid demands were unsustainable, setting aside the Commissioner's order and allowing the appellant's appeals. The decision underscored the importance of complying with statutory timelines for demands and invoking the extended period for show cause notices. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344662