https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218544 Job work clearances under Notification No. 214/1986-C.E. were held insufficient to sustain the extended limitation period where the principal manufacturer's declaration remained on record and was not withdrawn. On those facts, the job worker could reasonably proceed on the basis that the raw material was meant for use in manufacturing dutiable final products, so suppression or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty was not made out. The demand raised after about four to five years was therefore barred by limitation and was set aside, with the duty demand and penalty annulled. en-us Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218544 Job work clearances under Notification No. 214/1986-C.E. were held insufficient to sustain the extended limitation period where the principal manufacturer's declaration remained on record and was not withdrawn. On those facts, the job worker could reasonably proceed on the basis that the raw material was meant for use in manufacturing dutiable final products, so suppression or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty was not made out. The demand raised after about four to five years was therefore barred by limitation and was set aside, with the duty demand and penalty annulled. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218544