https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99134 Extended limitation for duty demands on clearances to Nepal was not justified where the assessee had disclosed the proposed exports in its Rule 174 declaration, the revenue knew the goods were being cleared without duty, and factory clearances remained below the exemption limit. A Board circular also supported the assessee's bona fide belief that the exports were covered by Notification No. 175/86-C.E. On those facts, suppression and deliberate evasion were not established, so the longer limitation period could not be invoked and the demand was time-barred. en-us Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:46:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99134 Extended limitation for duty demands on clearances to Nepal was not justified where the assessee had disclosed the proposed exports in its Rule 174 declaration, the revenue knew the goods were being cleared without duty, and factory clearances remained below the exemption limit. A Board circular also supported the assessee's bona fide belief that the exports were covered by Notification No. 175/86-C.E. On those facts, suppression and deliberate evasion were not established, so the longer limitation period could not be invoked and the demand was time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99134