Held - We find that the demand for October 2003 to September 2008 has been, thus, curtailed and the present demand leading to the impugned order relates to the period thereafter till 2012 for which show-cause notice was issued on 15th April 2014. We also find from the impugned order that the adjudicating authority has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nizam Sugar Factory v. Collector of Central Excise, A.P. [2006 (197) E.....

Held - As pointed in Tecumseh Products India Ltd. vs. C.C.E., Hyderabad 28; in Fedders Lloyd Corporation Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.C.E., New Delhi and in Modipon Fibre Company vs. C.CE.. Meerut, apart from the decision of the apex Court in Uniworth Textiles Ltd., the extended period of limitation could not be invoked when there is a bona fide dispute between the parties in regard to issues as to tax liability; where the department was aware of the essen.....

Held - Allegation of suppression of facts against the appellant cannot be sustained. When the first SCN was issued all the relevant facts were in the knowledge of the authorities. Later on, while issuing the second and third show cause notices the same/similar facts could not be taken as suppression of facts on the part of the assessee as these facts were already in the knowledge of the authorities. We agree with the view taken in the aforesai.....