https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420586 Demand for a period covered by provisional assessment was held premature until final assessment, because Section 11A applies only after duty is finally adjusted. For the later period, the commentary states that the extended limitation period was unavailable in the absence of suppression, misdeclaration, or fraudulent intent, so only the normal limitation period applied and time-bar operated beyond six months. Penalty under Rule 173Q was also treated as unwarranted where the dispute involved a bona fide controversy on assessability and valuation. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on the surviving demand and quantification after completion of provisional assessments. en-us Tue, 05 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Apr 2022 09:07:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420586 Demand for a period covered by provisional assessment was held premature until final assessment, because Section 11A applies only after duty is finally adjusted. For the later period, the commentary states that the extended limitation period was unavailable in the absence of suppression, misdeclaration, or fraudulent intent, so only the normal limitation period applied and time-bar operated beyond six months. Penalty under Rule 173Q was also treated as unwarranted where the dispute involved a bona fide controversy on assessability and valuation. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on the surviving demand and quantification after completion of provisional assessments. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420586