https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52705 Exemption under Notification No. 108/95, claimed on certificates issued by the Project Implementing Authority and furnished to the revenue, could not sustain extended limitation where the assessee acted bona fide and there was no suppression. The later withdrawal of the certificates did not, by itself, justify alleging fraud or suppression for the past period when the departmental authorities had not disputed the relevant status at the time. The Tribunal held that the department should have acted within the normal limitation period or resorted to provisional assessment, and the extended period was therefore not invocable. Demand, interest and penalty were set aside. en-us Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:51:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52705 Exemption under Notification No. 108/95, claimed on certificates issued by the Project Implementing Authority and furnished to the revenue, could not sustain extended limitation where the assessee acted bona fide and there was no suppression. The later withdrawal of the certificates did not, by itself, justify alleging fraud or suppression for the past period when the departmental authorities had not disputed the relevant status at the time. The Tribunal held that the department should have acted within the normal limitation period or resorted to provisional assessment, and the extended period was therefore not invocable. Demand, interest and penalty were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52705