https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90500 Wilful misstatement or suppression to invoke the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act was not established where the assessee had filed an approved classification list and declared the same goods in its returns. A mere incorrect classification, or a later change of opinion on the proper heading or sub-heading, did not by itself prove intent to evade duty. Because the department had access to the relevant declarations and could have revised the classification after hearing the assessee, there was no material showing concealment of true facts or deliberate evasion. The extended period of limitation was therefore unsustainable. en-us Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:50:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90500 Wilful misstatement or suppression to invoke the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act was not established where the assessee had filed an approved classification list and declared the same goods in its returns. A mere incorrect classification, or a later change of opinion on the proper heading or sub-heading, did not by itself prove intent to evade duty. Because the department had access to the relevant declarations and could have revised the classification after hearing the assessee, there was no material showing concealment of true facts or deliberate evasion. The extended period of limitation was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90500