Suppression and extended limitation fail where product disclosure and departmental knowledge negate intent to evade duty.

Extended limitation could not be invoked where the assessee consistently disclosed its product through brand-name descriptions, filed classification lists that were approved under the relevant heading, and had also disclosed bakery shortening in covering letters. The record showed that manufacturing permissions were obtained through the Vegetable Oil Products Directorate and communicated to Central Excise officers, establishing departmental knowledge of the activity. On those facts, suppression with intent to evade duty was not made out, so the demand was time-barred and the extended period of limitation was unavailable. The duty demand and penalty were therefore set aside on limitation alone, without adjudication on the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the duty demand was barred by limitation on the ground that the extended period could not be invoked for alleged suppression of facts.

Analysis: The appellants had consistently described their products by brand names and had filed classification lists which were approved under the relevant heading. The record also showed that bakery shortening had been disclosed in covering letters, that permissions for manufacture were obtained through the Vegetable Oil Products Directorate and endorsed to the Central Excise officers, and that the Department was aware of the manufacture. In these circumstances, suppression with intent to evade duty could not be attributed to the appellants, and the longer limitation period was not available.

Conclusion: The demand was barred by limitation and the extended period could not be invoked against the appellants.

Final Conclusion: The impugned duty demand and penalty were set aside, and the appeal succeeded on the ground of time bar without adjudication on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee has consistently disclosed the product in the course of classification and the Department has knowledge of the manufacture, mere non-description by technical name does not amount to suppression so as to justify invocation of the extended period of limitation.

---