https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119170 The demand was time-barred because the assessee had disclosed the product as cotton and lycra yarn in the stated ratio, and the absence of a prescribed form requiring further particulars meant there was no legal basis to allege suppression of facts. Correspondence between the parties on classification also negatived concealment, so the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked. As the duty demand failed on limitation, the connected penalty was unsustainable and could not be maintained. en-us Wed, 03 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:18:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119170 The demand was time-barred because the assessee had disclosed the product as cotton and lycra yarn in the stated ratio, and the absence of a prescribed form requiring further particulars meant there was no legal basis to allege suppression of facts. Correspondence between the parties on classification also negatived concealment, so the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked. As the duty demand failed on limitation, the connected penalty was unsustainable and could not be maintained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119170