https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114328 Central excise duty demand could not be sustained where the products were disclosed in classification lists filed from time to time and those lists were verified and approved by the Department. The record did not show wilful suppression of facts or misdeclaration with intent to evade duty, and mere classification under a particular heading was insufficient to trigger the extended limitation period under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Because the show cause notice covered a period beyond the normal six months, the demand was held time-barred and the extended period was not invocable. en-us Tue, 15 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 May 2012 17:35:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114328 Central excise duty demand could not be sustained where the products were disclosed in classification lists filed from time to time and those lists were verified and approved by the Department. The record did not show wilful suppression of facts or misdeclaration with intent to evade duty, and mere classification under a particular heading was insufficient to trigger the extended limitation period under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Because the show cause notice covered a period beyond the normal six months, the demand was held time-barred and the extended period was not invocable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114328