https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81309 Extended-period duty recovery under Section 11A could not be sustained because the Department failed to prove wilful misdeclaration, suppression, or intent to evade duty. The only test results relied on were for fabrics, not blended yarn, and the technical material indicated that fabric testing can cause variation in blend composition. Other samples matched the assessee's declaration, and the declaration was treated as a bona fide marginal declaration rather than conscious evasion. In the absence of proof of intent to evade, penalty was also unwarranted. The demand was therefore barred by limitation and the differential duty confirmation was set aside. en-us Fri, 26 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Jun 2011 17:16:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81309 Extended-period duty recovery under Section 11A could not be sustained because the Department failed to prove wilful misdeclaration, suppression, or intent to evade duty. The only test results relied on were for fabrics, not blended yarn, and the technical material indicated that fabric testing can cause variation in blend composition. Other samples matched the assessee's declaration, and the declaration was treated as a bona fide marginal declaration rather than conscious evasion. In the absence of proof of intent to evade, penalty was also unwarranted. The demand was therefore barred by limitation and the differential duty confirmation was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81309