Extended limitation under excise law requires suppression or misdeclaration; approved disclosures barred the time-barred demand.

A demand under central excise was examined on limitation, with the extended period under section 11A found unavailable because the assessee had filed an approved classification list and supporting label and drug-control documents. The Department already had the material facts needed to assess classification, and the record did not show deliberate suppression or misdeclaration. On those facts, the notice could not be sustained under the proviso to section 11A, so the demand was time-barred and the extended limitation period could not be invoked.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand was barred by limitation and the extended period under section 11A could be invoked.

Analysis: The product had been cleared after filing a classification list that was approved, along with the relevant label and drug-control documentation. The Department had all material facts necessary to examine classification, and the record did not establish deliberate suppression or misdeclaration so as to justify the extended limitation period. On these facts, the notice could not rest on the proviso to section 11A.

Conclusion: The demand was time-barred and the extended period of limitation was not invocable.

---