https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377475 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that there was no suppression of facts justifying the demand for the extended period. The appellant's excisable goods were classified under Chapter 25, attracting a nil rate of duty. Due to delays in issuing Show Cause Notices and lack of intent to evade payment, penalties were set aside, and demands for the normal period were confirmed. The case was remanded for re-quantification of demand within the normal limitation period. en-us Mon, 25 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Mar 2019 06:58:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377475 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that there was no suppression of facts justifying the demand for the extended period. The appellant's excisable goods were classified under Chapter 25, attracting a nil rate of duty. Due to delays in issuing Show Cause Notices and lack of intent to evade payment, penalties were set aside, and demands for the normal period were confirmed. The case was remanded for re-quantification of demand within the normal limitation period. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 25 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377475