https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368301 The High Court upheld the invocation of the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, ruling that suppression of facts justifies its application regardless of the department's knowledge. Additionally, the imposition of the penalty under Section 11AC was upheld as the assessee failed to meet the statutory requirements for a reduced penalty within the specified time frame. The court determined that the notification dated 09.07.2004 re-instituting an exemption did not have retrospective effect. The appeal was dismissed, with decisions favoring the department on all legal issues raised by the assessee. en-us Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Apr 2019 13:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368301 The High Court upheld the invocation of the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, ruling that suppression of facts justifies its application regardless of the department's knowledge. Additionally, the imposition of the penalty under Section 11AC was upheld as the assessee failed to meet the statutory requirements for a reduced penalty within the specified time frame. The court determined that the notification dated 09.07.2004 re-instituting an exemption did not have retrospective effect. The appeal was dismissed, with decisions favoring the department on all legal issues raised by the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368301