https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363665 The demand was held time-barred because the extended limitation period could not be invoked absent suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The appellants had disclosed the product description in returns, claimed exemption under the relevant notifications, and the department had multiple audits and notice of the description used. On those facts, no misdeclaration or suppression was established, so the demand failed on limitation and the appeals were allowed. en-us Fri, 09 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:07:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363665 The demand was held time-barred because the extended limitation period could not be invoked absent suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The appellants had disclosed the product description in returns, claimed exemption under the relevant notifications, and the department had multiple audits and notice of the description used. On those facts, no misdeclaration or suppression was established, so the demand failed on limitation and the appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363665