https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96511 An exemption confined to agricultural implements and parts classifiable under Chapter 82 could not be extended to parts of agricultural machinery admittedly falling under Chapter 84 for the period before the amendment brought Chapter 84 goods within the notification's scope. The later enlargement of the exemption operated only from 14-3-1986, so the benefit was unavailable for the disputed earlier period. On limitation, the demand was not held time-barred because the notices alleged non-disclosure of the true nature of the goods, and that allegation was not shown to be incorrect on the record. The extended period under Section 11A was therefore treated as validly invoked. en-us Thu, 02 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:32:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96511 An exemption confined to agricultural implements and parts classifiable under Chapter 82 could not be extended to parts of agricultural machinery admittedly falling under Chapter 84 for the period before the amendment brought Chapter 84 goods within the notification's scope. The later enlargement of the exemption operated only from 14-3-1986, so the benefit was unavailable for the disputed earlier period. On limitation, the demand was not held time-barred because the notices alleged non-disclosure of the true nature of the goods, and that allegation was not shown to be incorrect on the record. The extended period under Section 11A was therefore treated as validly invoked. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96511