Limitation and suppression in SAD demand: disclosed import documents defeated extended period, and the appeal could not be dismissed without merits.

Where the importer disclosed the exemption claim in the Bills of Entry, the Department could not invoke the extended period to raise a Special Additional Duty demand after more than four years without proving suppression. The disclosed import documents showed that the relevant facts were available at assessment, so limitation barred the demand. The appellate authority also erred in dismissing the first appeal only for non-appearance without examining the grounds already raised, including limitation. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of Special Additional Duty was barred by limitation for want of suppression, and whether the appellate order dismissing the first appeal without deciding the merits could be sustained.

Analysis: The import documents showed that the exemption claim was disclosed in the Bills of Entry, and the imports were made soon after the amendment relied upon by the Department. In such circumstances, the Department was expected to examine the claim at the time of assessment and could not, after more than four years, invoke the extended period without establishing suppression on the part of the importer. The appellate authority also erred in dismissing the appeal solely for non-appearance without dealing with the grounds already raised in the memorandum of appeal, including the plea of limitation.

Conclusion: The demand could not be sustained by invoking suppression or the extended period of limitation, and the dismissal of the first appeal without merits was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief as permissible in law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the relevant facts are disclosed in the import documents and the Department fails to establish suppression, the extended period cannot be invoked to raise a duty demand after the normal limitation period; an appellate authority must also decide the grounds on merits even in the absence of appearance.

---