https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152248 A limitation defence succeeded because the import records described the goods as betel nuts, and the record did not show suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. Revenue's later case that the goods were actually areca nuts and that an exemption notification was wrongly claimed was not enough to extend the limitation period. The demand was therefore treated as time barred, and the appeal was dismissed in favour of the respondent. en-us Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Jun 2013 17:38:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152248 A limitation defence succeeded because the import records described the goods as betel nuts, and the record did not show suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. Revenue's later case that the goods were actually areca nuts and that an exemption notification was wrongly claimed was not enough to extend the limitation period. The demand was therefore treated as time barred, and the appeal was dismissed in favour of the respondent. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152248