https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46490 The court upheld the withdrawal of exemption under Notification No. 116/69 for an assessee manufacturing Darzamol Injection I.V. due to Dextrose not meeting the required criteria. Allegations of suppression of facts by the assessee were dismissed as the Revenue failed to provide evidence. The invocation of the proviso to Section 11-A(1) of the Central Excise Act for an extended period was rejected due to insufficient proof of suppression. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the demand for the extended period, with authorities allowed to raise a fresh demand within the statutory limitation period. en-us Wed, 05 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jun 2014 12:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46490 The court upheld the withdrawal of exemption under Notification No. 116/69 for an assessee manufacturing Darzamol Injection I.V. due to Dextrose not meeting the required criteria. Allegations of suppression of facts by the assessee were dismissed as the Revenue failed to provide evidence. The invocation of the proviso to Section 11-A(1) of the Central Excise Act for an extended period was rejected due to insufficient proof of suppression. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the demand for the extended period, with authorities allowed to raise a fresh demand within the statutory limitation period. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46490