https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358265 The High Court analyzed substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue, noting that while the impugned order favored the Revenue on the demand merits, it failed to address the crucial issue of limitation. Emphasizing the importance of the extended limitation period, the Court directed the Tribunal to determine if the demand could be raised after the initial limitation period had lapsed. Considering arguments on the limitation period, the Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal to independently decide if the demand was sustainable or time-barred, based on Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, allowing the appeal solely on the issue of time bar/limitation. en-us Mon, 02 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Apr 2018 07:45:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358265 The High Court analyzed substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue, noting that while the impugned order favored the Revenue on the demand merits, it failed to address the crucial issue of limitation. Emphasizing the importance of the extended limitation period, the Court directed the Tribunal to determine if the demand could be raised after the initial limitation period had lapsed. Considering arguments on the limitation period, the Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal to independently decide if the demand was sustainable or time-barred, based on Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, allowing the appeal solely on the issue of time bar/limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 02 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358265