https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93095 A classification list under Rule 173B(1)(a) had to disclose all goods produced and intended for removal, but non-declaration alone was not enough to establish suppression, wilful misstatement or fraud for the extended limitation period. On the facts, the assessee's belief that the disputed item was waste and not dutiable goods was treated as bona fide, and the surrounding circumstances did not show an intent to evade duty. The demand was therefore time-barred, and the issue of excisability on merits was left unexamined. en-us Mon, 27 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2011 13:13:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93095 A classification list under Rule 173B(1)(a) had to disclose all goods produced and intended for removal, but non-declaration alone was not enough to establish suppression, wilful misstatement or fraud for the extended limitation period. On the facts, the assessee's belief that the disputed item was waste and not dutiable goods was treated as bona fide, and the surrounding circumstances did not show an intent to evade duty. The demand was therefore time-barred, and the issue of excisability on merits was left unexamined. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93095