https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769405 CESTAT Mumbai held that the appellant's classification of RBD Palm Stearin and HPS under Chapter 15 was based on CBEC Circular 81/2002-Customs, which was subsequently withdrawn following the SC's decision in Jocil Ltd. The department issued SCN on 23.03.2014 for the period November 2009 to March 2011, invoking extended limitation. The Tribunal ruled that extended limitation under Section 11A cannot be invoked absent evidence of fraud, suppression, or wilful misstatement. Since the appellant's classification was bona fide, supported by official circulars and proper documentation, with no intent to evade duty, the SCN was time-barred. Appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769405 CESTAT Mumbai held that the appellant's classification of RBD Palm Stearin and HPS under Chapter 15 was based on CBEC Circular 81/2002-Customs, which was subsequently withdrawn following the SC's decision in Jocil Ltd. The department issued SCN on 23.03.2014 for the period November 2009 to March 2011, invoking extended limitation. The Tribunal ruled that extended limitation under Section 11A cannot be invoked absent evidence of fraud, suppression, or wilful misstatement. Since the appellant's classification was bona fide, supported by official circulars and proper documentation, with no intent to evade duty, the SCN was time-barred. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769405