https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87339 Disclosure in the price lists of valuation on a cost-plus-manufacturing-profit basis was sufficient to alert the department that post-manufacturing elements were excluded, and departmental scrutiny without timely action did not support suppression of facts. The extended limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was therefore unavailable, making the duty and cess demand time-barred. The plea of provisional assessment also failed because no proper order, permission, or prescribed bond was shown, so clearances could not be treated as provisional. The cited Supreme Court ruling was held inapplicable because it concerned refund on final assessment, not demand proceedings. en-us Wed, 05 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 May 2019 14:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87339 Disclosure in the price lists of valuation on a cost-plus-manufacturing-profit basis was sufficient to alert the department that post-manufacturing elements were excluded, and departmental scrutiny without timely action did not support suppression of facts. The extended limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was therefore unavailable, making the duty and cess demand time-barred. The plea of provisional assessment also failed because no proper order, permission, or prescribed bond was shown, so clearances could not be treated as provisional. The cited Supreme Court ruling was held inapplicable because it concerned refund on final assessment, not demand proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87339