1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.254 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik. ...Appellant. vs. M/s.Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. ...Respondent. --- Mr.K.R.Chaudhary with N.D.Sharma, for Appellant. Mr.P.S.Shah i/b. PDS Legal, for Respondent. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 16TH July, 2008. P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for appellant. No exception can be taken to the finding that the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, is not available to 2 the appellant in this case, because the respondent while work was going on in the year 1988 itself, had given full information. In the letter dated 21.8.1988 the authorities themselves mentioned that the statements were recorded by the authorities on 21.8.1988. We find that the findings recorded by the Tribunal is reasonable. No interference is called for. In any case no question of law arises. Hence, the appeal is rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) ---