Limitation and suppression of facts: time-barred demand failed where approved classification list and inadequate particulars did not prove suppression.

A demand was held time-barred because suppression of facts was not substantiated for the relevant period. The classification list had been filed and approved, and the notice and charge memorandum did not contain adequate particulars to support a suppression allegation. Later notices for subsequent periods did not establish suppression for the period in dispute, and the mere observation that the goods were not disclosed as designed to be placed on the floor was insufficient on its own. The limitation objection therefore succeeded, and the appeal was allowed without examination of the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand was barred by limitation in the absence of substantiated suppression of facts.

Analysis: The period in dispute preceded the show cause notice, and the classification list had been filed and approved. The allegation of suppression was not supported by any adequate particulars in the notice or in the charge memorandum. Reliance on subsequent notices for later periods did not establish suppression for the relevant period. The observation that the goods had not been disclosed as designed to be placed on the floor was held insufficient, by itself, to sustain the charge of suppression.

Conclusion: The limitation objection succeeded, and the appeal was allowed without examining the merits.

---