https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43638 The extended five-year limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was held applicable where the assessee made a misstatement or suppressed material facts with intent to evade duty. The Court treated repeated claims that the product was exempt sagol as contrary to departmental findings that it was lime powder or calcium hydroxide, and noted the allegation that partnership records had been manipulated. It held that the department's prior awareness of manufacture or sampling did not by itself defeat the proviso. The demand was therefore not time-barred. en-us Fri, 29 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:45:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43638 The extended five-year limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was held applicable where the assessee made a misstatement or suppressed material facts with intent to evade duty. The Court treated repeated claims that the product was exempt sagol as contrary to departmental findings that it was lime powder or calcium hydroxide, and noted the allegation that partnership records had been manipulated. It held that the department's prior awareness of manufacture or sampling did not by itself defeat the proviso. The demand was therefore not time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43638