https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122893 A deliberate misdescription of goods was treated as suppression and misdeclaration where the classification finding was not challenged, so the extended period of limitation remained available to the Revenue and the duty demand was sustained. The penalty, already reduced in appeal, was not further interfered with because no additional ground for reduction was shown, and the reduced penalty was upheld. en-us Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Aug 2012 15:15:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122893 A deliberate misdescription of goods was treated as suppression and misdeclaration where the classification finding was not challenged, so the extended period of limitation remained available to the Revenue and the duty demand was sustained. The penalty, already reduced in appeal, was not further interfered with because no additional ground for reduction was shown, and the reduced penalty was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122893