https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53975 The text explains that the extended limitation period for central excise demand could apply only for the earlier period, because once the department had knowledge of the manufacturing activity and exemption claim, suppression could not be treated as continuing. It also states that Modvat credit of duty actually paid could not be denied by the adjudicating authority where the credit had already been allowed in an earlier remand order and no appeal had been filed against that determination. Duty was further to be recomputed on a cum-duty price basis, with any consequential penalty to be reconsidered after hearing the assessee. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Oct 2010 11:56:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53975 The text explains that the extended limitation period for central excise demand could apply only for the earlier period, because once the department had knowledge of the manufacturing activity and exemption claim, suppression could not be treated as continuing. It also states that Modvat credit of duty actually paid could not be denied by the adjudicating authority where the credit had already been allowed in an earlier remand order and no appeal had been filed against that determination. Duty was further to be recomputed on a cum-duty price basis, with any consequential penalty to be reconsidered after hearing the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53975