2019 (2) TMI 572

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Dave, learned advocate for the appellant invited the attention of the court to the audit report No. 51/2010-11 dated 3.9.2010 to point out that it was during the course of audit, while reconciling the figures shown in the ST-3 returns filed by the assessee, that the audit department had noticed certain facts. It was pointed out that while the audit report is dated 3.9.2010, the show cause-cum-dem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ilment and utilization of cenvat credit was noticed only when they were sought by the audit. It was submitted that if the audit department could have called for such details, the officers while assessing the returns could also have sought for such details and, hence, it cannot be said that the appellant had suppressed any facts while filing the said returns so as to justify invocation of the exten .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... suppression on the part of the appellant, the Tribunal was not justified in upholding the invocation of the extended period of limitation. 2. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner, the court is of the view that the appeal requires consideration. Hence, ADMIT. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration. "(A) Whether on the fa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X