https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94030 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, as the demand for excise duty was deemed time-barred due to the absence of wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, and the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. The appellant's argument regarding eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 175/86 for goods manufactured in the Ramkola factory was supported by the Registration Certificate of the Lucknow factory, which was submitted to the Department before the classification list was filed in 1989. en-us Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:28:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94030 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, as the demand for excise duty was deemed time-barred due to the absence of wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, and the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. The appellant's argument regarding eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 175/86 for goods manufactured in the Ramkola factory was supported by the Registration Certificate of the Lucknow factory, which was submitted to the Department before the classification list was filed in 1989. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94030