https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759000 CESTAT New Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order dated 31.03.2021. The tribunal held that extended period of limitation could not be invoked as the appellant had not suppressed facts with intent to evade central excise duty. The appellant maintained proper records, filed Form D-3 intimations, and underwent regular audits without discrepancies being noticed. The department failed to establish deliberate suppression with intent to evade duty. Since the entire demand was covered under extended period of limitation, which was wrongly invoked, the order was set aside. en-us Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Sep 2024 09:10:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759000 CESTAT New Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order dated 31.03.2021. The tribunal held that extended period of limitation could not be invoked as the appellant had not suppressed facts with intent to evade central excise duty. The appellant maintained proper records, filed Form D-3 intimations, and underwent regular audits without discrepancies being noticed. The department failed to establish deliberate suppression with intent to evade duty. Since the entire demand was covered under extended period of limitation, which was wrongly invoked, the order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759000