https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421266 A second show cause notice on the same settled facts and overlapping period was held unsustainable after an earlier speaking order had dropped the first notice and attained finality. The principle of consistency barred reopening the issue in the absence of fresh material. The extended period of limitation also could not be invoked because the facts relating to manufacture, scrap generation, and duty payment were already known to the department; a bare allegation of wilful suppression was insufficient. As a result, the connected demand, penalty, and interest could not survive, while the questions on reversal of credit and removal of waste and scrap were left open. en-us Mon, 18 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Apr 2022 08:31:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421266 A second show cause notice on the same settled facts and overlapping period was held unsustainable after an earlier speaking order had dropped the first notice and attained finality. The principle of consistency barred reopening the issue in the absence of fresh material. The extended period of limitation also could not be invoked because the facts relating to manufacture, scrap generation, and duty payment were already known to the department; a bare allegation of wilful suppression was insufficient. As a result, the connected demand, penalty, and interest could not survive, while the questions on reversal of credit and removal of waste and scrap were left open. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421266