https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126920 Taspa yarn produced by a slub-effect process was held classifiable under Heading 56.06, because the Supreme Court's later ruling in D.P. Lon on an identical manufacturing process governed over an earlier Larger Bench view. The Tribunal also held that a bona fide classification dispute supported by Board circulars and conflicting Tribunal decisions did not show suppression or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty, so the extended period of limitation was unavailable. On the same basis, penalty was unwarranted. The classification position was upheld, but the demand beyond the normal limitation period failed and only the limited duty within time remained recoverable. en-us Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:55:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126920 Taspa yarn produced by a slub-effect process was held classifiable under Heading 56.06, because the Supreme Court's later ruling in D.P. Lon on an identical manufacturing process governed over an earlier Larger Bench view. The Tribunal also held that a bona fide classification dispute supported by Board circulars and conflicting Tribunal decisions did not show suppression or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty, so the extended period of limitation was unavailable. On the same basis, penalty was unwarranted. The classification position was upheld, but the demand beyond the normal limitation period failed and only the limited duty within time remained recoverable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126920