https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48163 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that there was no suppression of facts or intent to evade duty by the assessee, rendering the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, inapplicable. The imposition of the penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(bb) of the Central Excise Rules was deemed unjustified due to the absence of mens rea. The Court emphasized the necessity of proving both suppression and intent to evade duty for the extended period of limitation to be invoked. en-us Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48163 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that there was no suppression of facts or intent to evade duty by the assessee, rendering the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, inapplicable. The imposition of the penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(bb) of the Central Excise Rules was deemed unjustified due to the absence of mens rea. The Court emphasized the necessity of proving both suppression and intent to evade duty for the extended period of limitation to be invoked. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48163