https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372161 For invoking the extended period under Section 11A(1), the mere date of departmental inspection was not decisive; limitation turned on when the department acquired meaningful knowledge of the alleged suppression after examining seized records and related correspondence, so the notice dated 17.05.1996 was treated as within time. The declarations accepted earlier did not create finality on the classification claim. The supplementary show cause notice was also treated as an add-on demand for omitted Special Excise Duty, without altering the underlying suppression basis, and it remained within the limitation position already sustained for the original notice. en-us Fri, 14 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Dec 2018 07:02:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372161 For invoking the extended period under Section 11A(1), the mere date of departmental inspection was not decisive; limitation turned on when the department acquired meaningful knowledge of the alleged suppression after examining seized records and related correspondence, so the notice dated 17.05.1996 was treated as within time. The declarations accepted earlier did not create finality on the classification claim. The supplementary show cause notice was also treated as an add-on demand for omitted Special Excise Duty, without altering the underlying suppression basis, and it remained within the limitation position already sustained for the original notice. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372161