https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46798 The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, holding that the show cause-cum-demand notice was not valid due to being time-barred and lacking a valid foundation. The court emphasized the need for a positive act of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts to extend the limitation period. It rejected allegations of suppression of facts or wilful misstatement, noting the approval of classification lists by excise authorities. The court allowed the writ petition, confirmed the interim order, and directed the supply of certified copies of the judgment to the parties within seven days, without costs. en-us Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:17:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46798 The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, holding that the show cause-cum-demand notice was not valid due to being time-barred and lacking a valid foundation. The court emphasized the need for a positive act of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts to extend the limitation period. It rejected allegations of suppression of facts or wilful misstatement, noting the approval of classification lists by excise authorities. The court allowed the writ petition, confirmed the interim order, and directed the supply of certified copies of the judgment to the parties within seven days, without costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46798