https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84845 Central excise duty demand was held time-barred because the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A could not be justified on the facts. The Tribunal accepted that there was a genuine departmental doubt over classification of master batches and that the assessee's belief that no further duty was payable was bona fide. It also noted that full particulars were declared in February 1981, the Chemical Examiner's report was available in June 1982, and the show cause notice was issued only in March 1984, covering a period beyond five years. The Revenue's attempt to treat the entire demand as within time therefore failed. en-us Wed, 04 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Aug 2011 11:21:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84845 Central excise duty demand was held time-barred because the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A could not be justified on the facts. The Tribunal accepted that there was a genuine departmental doubt over classification of master batches and that the assessee's belief that no further duty was payable was bona fide. It also noted that full particulars were declared in February 1981, the Chemical Examiner's report was available in June 1982, and the show cause notice was issued only in March 1984, covering a period beyond five years. The Revenue's attempt to treat the entire demand as within time therefore failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84845