https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255480 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the assessee had consistently disclosed the classification position and the dispute was rooted in a bona fide classification controversy known in the trade. Suppression must be deliberate and wilful, with intent to evade duty; a mere disputed classification issue or omission without mala fide intent does not qualify. As there was no positive act to conceal material facts, the demand was time-barred. The penalty also could not survive because it was consequential to the unsustainable demand. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255480 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the assessee had consistently disclosed the classification position and the dispute was rooted in a bona fide classification controversy known in the trade. Suppression must be deliberate and wilful, with intent to evade duty; a mere disputed classification issue or omission without mala fide intent does not qualify. As there was no positive act to conceal material facts, the demand was time-barred. The penalty also could not survive because it was consequential to the unsustainable demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255480