https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92486 The demand of duty was barred by limitation because the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A(1) could not be invoked. The goods had been described to the department as a degreasing preparation, the classification list had been approved, and RT-12 assessments had also been accepted. On those facts, there was no suppression of material facts or basis to infer an intention to evade duty, and the department could not shift the entire responsibility for verifying classification onto the assessee. The disputed demand was therefore time-barred. en-us Mon, 27 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:37:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92486 The demand of duty was barred by limitation because the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A(1) could not be invoked. The goods had been described to the department as a degreasing preparation, the classification list had been approved, and RT-12 assessments had also been accepted. On those facts, there was no suppression of material facts or basis to infer an intention to evade duty, and the department could not shift the entire responsibility for verifying classification onto the assessee. The disputed demand was therefore time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92486