https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111381 Disclosure of the appellant's Chapter 39 classification to the department barred invocation of the extended limitation period for recovering differential duty on the disputed classification. The earlier appellate order had only required a fresh classification decision after notice, so the department could not treat the matter as one involving suppression or other grounds justifying extended time. The notice for differential duty was therefore not sustainable on limitation grounds, and the duty demand was without authority. en-us Sat, 01 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:01:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111381 Disclosure of the appellant's Chapter 39 classification to the department barred invocation of the extended limitation period for recovering differential duty on the disputed classification. The earlier appellate order had only required a fresh classification decision after notice, so the department could not treat the matter as one involving suppression or other grounds justifying extended time. The notice for differential duty was therefore not sustainable on limitation grounds, and the duty demand was without authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 01 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111381