https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42060 Wilful misstatement or suppression of facts was not established where the department already knew the unit's ownership, manufacture details, exemption claim and declarations. Mere non-payment of duty after a later notification did not, without more, attract the extended five-year limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On the recorded facts, the proviso extending limitation was not applicable, so penalty could not be sustained beyond the normal six-month period and was liable to be quashed. en-us Mon, 23 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:23:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42060 Wilful misstatement or suppression of facts was not established where the department already knew the unit's ownership, manufacture details, exemption claim and declarations. Mere non-payment of duty after a later notification did not, without more, attract the extended five-year limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On the recorded facts, the proviso extending limitation was not applicable, so penalty could not be sustained beyond the normal six-month period and was liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42060