https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777364 CESTAT (AT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned Commissioner (Appeals) order dated 13.10.2021, holding the extended five-year limitation under section 11A(4) of the Central Excise Act was not correctly invoked. The tribunal found the demand (April 2016-June 2017) fell within the extended period but the requisite wilful suppression with intent to evade duty was not established; consequently the extended period could not be applied and the confirmed recovery of CENVAT credit with interest and penalty was quashed. en-us Tue, 19 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Aug 2025 08:56:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777364 CESTAT (AT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned Commissioner (Appeals) order dated 13.10.2021, holding the extended five-year limitation under section 11A(4) of the Central Excise Act was not correctly invoked. The tribunal found the demand (April 2016-June 2017) fell within the extended period but the requisite wilful suppression with intent to evade duty was not established; consequently the extended period could not be applied and the confirmed recovery of CENVAT credit with interest and penalty was quashed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777364