https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91006 A demand for duty was held time-barred because the material did not establish wilful suppression or misstatement of facts. The product had been declared in the classification form as non-excisable, and there was no requirement at that stage to disclose the percentage content of ethyl alcohol. The dispute on excisability was itself under consideration, and the assessee relied on prior tribunal authority supporting its position. On those facts, the finding of suppression could not be sustained, so the extended limitation period was unavailable. en-us Mon, 17 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:46:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91006 A demand for duty was held time-barred because the material did not establish wilful suppression or misstatement of facts. The product had been declared in the classification form as non-excisable, and there was no requirement at that stage to disclose the percentage content of ethyl alcohol. The dispute on excisability was itself under consideration, and the assessee relied on prior tribunal authority supporting its position. On those facts, the finding of suppression could not be sustained, so the extended limitation period was unavailable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91006