https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48326 The High Court upheld the CESTAT's decision, ruling that the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not applicable. The Court emphasized that there was no wilful suppression or misstatement of facts by the assessee to evade duty, as earlier proceedings did not allege such conduct. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the CESTAT's order. en-us Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48326 The High Court upheld the CESTAT's decision, ruling that the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not applicable. The Court emphasized that there was no wilful suppression or misstatement of facts by the assessee to evade duty, as earlier proceedings did not allege such conduct. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the CESTAT's order. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48326