https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45348 Detention of plant and machinery and the consequential excise demand were upheld against the lessor because the unit remained in the lessee's possession when duty was unpaid, the alleged surrender was not shown to be bona fide, and Rule 230 allowed detention in those circumstances. The objection that the lessor was not in possession was rejected. Limitation was also negatived because the facts disclosed suppression and lack of bona fide disclosure, bringing the case within the extended five-year period under the excise limitation proviso rather than the normal six-month period. The recovery was therefore not time-barred and the writ petition failed. en-us Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jul 2010 10:27:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45348 Detention of plant and machinery and the consequential excise demand were upheld against the lessor because the unit remained in the lessee's possession when duty was unpaid, the alleged surrender was not shown to be bona fide, and Rule 230 allowed detention in those circumstances. The objection that the lessor was not in possession was rejected. Limitation was also negatived because the facts disclosed suppression and lack of bona fide disclosure, bringing the case within the extended five-year period under the excise limitation proviso rather than the normal six-month period. The recovery was therefore not time-barred and the writ petition failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45348