In Brief
The Supreme Court dismissed two revenue appeals against Reliance Industries concerning excise duty demands for the period 2000-2004. The revenue alleged that the assessee failed to include duty benefits from advance licence transfers in its assessable value and suppressed facts. The Court held that demands were time-barred within the normal one-year limitation period. The assessee acted bonafide, following a CESTAT interpretation that was later reversed only by the Supreme Court in 2005. The returns contained no separate column for deemed exports, so their inclusion within domestic clearances was proper. An assessee can only be accused of suppressing facts legally required to be disclosed. The Court emphasized that in interpretive disputes with plausible alternative views, invoking extended limitation is unjustified.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.