https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84329 Extended limitation was upheld because the disclosed manufacturing details did not conclusively show that the department knew petroleum jelly emerged as an intermediate product, and the failure to declare was not shown to be bona fide. On classification, petroleum jelly under Heading 27.12 was treated as a distinct excisable commodity requiring conformity with the HSN characteristics, but the existing test report was considered insufficient on its own. A fresh test of the remanent sample and reconsideration of classification and duty liability were directed on remand. The dissent would have held that neither petroleum jelly nor suppression with intent to evade duty was established. en-us Thu, 27 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jul 2011 12:34:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84329 Extended limitation was upheld because the disclosed manufacturing details did not conclusively show that the department knew petroleum jelly emerged as an intermediate product, and the failure to declare was not shown to be bona fide. On classification, petroleum jelly under Heading 27.12 was treated as a distinct excisable commodity requiring conformity with the HSN characteristics, but the existing test report was considered insufficient on its own. A fresh test of the remanent sample and reconsideration of classification and duty liability were directed on remand. The dissent would have held that neither petroleum jelly nor suppression with intent to evade duty was established. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84329