Wrong tariff classification alone does not justify extended limitation without proof of wilful suppression or misstatement.

A wrong tariff classification by itself does not establish wilful suppression or misdeclaration for extending limitation. The product was disclosed as Jaljira powder in the classification list, and the reference to heading 09.03 was treated as a generic description used with other products. As the record showed no deliberate withholding of material facts, the ingredients for invoking the extended period were absent, and the duty demand based on that period could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extended period of limitation was available to the department for demand of duty on the ground that the product had been classified under a wrong heading and whether such classification amounted to wilful suppression or misdeclaration.

Analysis: The product had been declared as Jaljira powder in the classification list, and the reference to heading 09.03 was a generic description used along with other products. Mere adoption of a particular tariff heading, without more, does not by itself establish suppression of facts or wilful misstatement. Since the record did not show any deliberate withholding of material facts, the ingredients necessary to invoke the extended period were not satisfied.

Conclusion: The extended period of limitation was not available to the department, and the demand based on that period could not be sustained in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: A mere wrong claim of tariff classification, without evidence of deliberate suppression or wilful misstatement of material facts, does not justify invocation of the extended period of limitation.

---