https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351155 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was unavailable because the sales policy and sales agreement forming the basis of the demand were already within the Department's knowledge in 1997. On that factual foundation, no suppression of facts or misstatement could be attributed to the assessee, so the demand had to be raised within the normal limitation period. The reasoning was held to be supported by record and did not give rise to any substantial question of law. The demand was therefore time barred. en-us Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jan 2018 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351155 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was unavailable because the sales policy and sales agreement forming the basis of the demand were already within the Department's knowledge in 1997. On that factual foundation, no suppression of facts or misstatement could be attributed to the assessee, so the demand had to be raised within the normal limitation period. The reasoning was held to be supported by record and did not give rise to any substantial question of law. The demand was therefore time barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351155