https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93071 Internal movement of raw naphtha within a bonded refinery area for flushing a transmission line, followed by contamination and recycling into the manufacturing process, was treated as a non-dutiable internal operation rather than a clearance for home consumption. The article states that continuous intimation to the department meant there was no suppression of material facts, so the extended limitation period could not be invoked. It also notes that rejection of a request under Section 11C did not itself establish that duty was leviable, because that rejection did not decide the merits of dutiability. en-us Fri, 03 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93071 Internal movement of raw naphtha within a bonded refinery area for flushing a transmission line, followed by contamination and recycling into the manufacturing process, was treated as a non-dutiable internal operation rather than a clearance for home consumption. The article states that continuous intimation to the department meant there was no suppression of material facts, so the extended limitation period could not be invoked. It also notes that rejection of a request under Section 11C did not itself establish that duty was leviable, because that rejection did not decide the merits of dutiability. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93071