https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255016 Extended limitation for duty demand was held inapplicable where the record showed prior disclosure of clearances, invoices, realization details, and departmental awareness, so suppression and intent to evade duty were not established. For the normal period, duty attached only to the identified clearance under the invoice dated 16-7-2004, with interest following the duty liability from the date it arose until payment, but penalty was not justified because the matter turned on duty consequence and classification rather than contumacious conduct. The demand was therefore confined to the single normal-period clearance. en-us Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Jan 2015 10:17:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255016 Extended limitation for duty demand was held inapplicable where the record showed prior disclosure of clearances, invoices, realization details, and departmental awareness, so suppression and intent to evade duty were not established. For the normal period, duty attached only to the identified clearance under the invoice dated 16-7-2004, with interest following the duty liability from the date it arose until payment, but penalty was not justified because the matter turned on duty consequence and classification rather than contumacious conduct. The demand was therefore confined to the single normal-period clearance. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255016