https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175184 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not available because the record showed no wilful suppression or deliberate misdeclaration with intent to evade duty. Although the appellant did not file Part II price lists for UNICEF supplies, the gate passes, invoices and monthly RT-12 returns were on record, and the invoices disclosed both the US dollar price and the excisable value in Indian rupees. As the duty on UNICEF supplies was fully reimbursed under a cash compensation scheme, the non-disclosure of the contract price in the price lists could not justify invocation of the extended limitation period, and the show cause notice was time-barred. en-us Wed, 12 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Nov 2015 12:59:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175184 The extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not available because the record showed no wilful suppression or deliberate misdeclaration with intent to evade duty. Although the appellant did not file Part II price lists for UNICEF supplies, the gate passes, invoices and monthly RT-12 returns were on record, and the invoices disclosed both the US dollar price and the excisable value in Indian rupees. As the duty on UNICEF supplies was fully reimbursed under a cash compensation scheme, the non-disclosure of the contract price in the price lists could not justify invocation of the extended limitation period, and the show cause notice was time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175184