Disclosure in classification disputes can defeat extended limitation where suppression is not prima facie shown, supporting interim stay relief.

Classification was disclosed and approved, and the record showed the department could have drawn samples earlier or used provisional assessment while classification was under consideration. On that prima facie basis, extended limitation for suppression or misdeclaration was not justified, and interim protection was granted: stay of recovery was allowed, waiver of duty and penalty recovery followed, and confiscation-related consequences were kept in abeyance pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand was prima facie barred by limitation for want of suppression or misdeclaration; and whether stay and waiver of recovery of duty, penalty, and consequential confiscation relief were warranted pending disposal of the appeal.

Analysis: The product description had been declared and classification had been sought under the relevant tariff entries, with the classification lists having been approved. The record indicated that nothing prevented the department from drawing samples earlier or resorting to provisional assessment pending decision on classification. On this prima facie view, invocation of the extended period on the basis of suppression was not justified. The challenge therefore supported interim protection against recovery.

Outcome: Stay was granted and recovery of the duty and penalty amounts was waived pending disposal of the appeal, and the confiscation-related consequences were kept in abeyance. No final adjudication on the merits of the appeal was made.

---