https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447523 CESTAT Kolkata held that the appellant did not suppress facts regarding sales tax concession retention, as tribunal precedents supported non-inclusion in assessable value for Central Excise duty calculation. Since VAT details were reflected in audited financial statements and no positive suppression act was proven, extended limitation period under Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked. The demand confirmed through extended period was set aside, penalty was not imposable, and the matter was remanded for duty calculation within normal limitation period with consequential relief. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:56:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447523 CESTAT Kolkata held that the appellant did not suppress facts regarding sales tax concession retention, as tribunal precedents supported non-inclusion in assessable value for Central Excise duty calculation. Since VAT details were reflected in audited financial statements and no positive suppression act was proven, extended limitation period under Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked. The demand confirmed through extended period was set aside, penalty was not imposable, and the matter was remanded for duty calculation within normal limitation period with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447523