https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81688 Glass jars of the stated size were treated as glassware under the residuary glass entry rather than as parts of storage batteries, because the relevant ISI specification concerned a different type of wet cell and the jars retained their essential character despite exclusive supply to the Railways. On limitation and penalty, the record showed that the department already knew the relevant facts and had earlier questioned and approved the classification, so misdeclaration or suppression was not established. Extended limitation was therefore not available, confiscation and penalty were not justified, and duty recovery was confined to the normal six-month period. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 12:19:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81688 Glass jars of the stated size were treated as glassware under the residuary glass entry rather than as parts of storage batteries, because the relevant ISI specification concerned a different type of wet cell and the jars retained their essential character despite exclusive supply to the Railways. On limitation and penalty, the record showed that the department already knew the relevant facts and had earlier questioned and approved the classification, so misdeclaration or suppression was not established. Extended limitation was therefore not available, confiscation and penalty were not justified, and duty recovery was confined to the normal six-month period. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81688