JUDGMENT : The issue in these appeals is whether the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could be invoked. The period in question is 11-7-1991 to 31-3-1993. The show cause notice was issued on 26-2-1993. 2. The subject matter of the show cause notice pertained to the classification of the respondents, product namely, `Ossopan'. The product was initially classified under Tariff Heading 3003.10 as a drug. On the application made by the respondents the product was reclassified under Tariff Heading 02.01 on 6-6-1991. According to the respondents, the Assistant Collector, Central Excise had passed a similar order dated 27-2-1991 in the case of M/s. American Remedies Ltd. in respect of its product `NATCAL' (a product similar to Ossopan) classifying it under Tariff Heading 02.01. 3. It was the respondents' case that clearances in accordance with the approved classification would not attract the proviso to Section 11A of the Act. According to the show cause notice, the complete records had not been produced before the Assistant Collector, Central Excise and that there was suppression of material fact in obtaining the approval of classified list on 6-6-1991. In the show cause notice it is alleged that the product was at all material times appropriately classifiable under T.H. 3000.10. 4. The matter came up before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was of the view that the product was correctly classifiable under T.H.3003.10. In affirming this, the Tribunal had followed its earlier decision in the case of M/s. American Remedies Ltd. However, the Tribunal upheld the contention of the respondents/assessees to the extent that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked because of the approval of the classification list. 5. In our opinion, the approval of the classification list by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, on 6-6-1991, it could not be said to have been done without application of mind. A copy of the order of the Assistant Collector Central Excise dated 6-9-1991 has also been produced before us. It is not a mere cursory reasoning but a detailed investigation into the facts and conclusion reached on the basis of those facts. It may be that the Assistant Collector Central Excise was wrong in approving the classification of Ossopan under T-H. 02.01. It is not a mere cursory reasoning but a detailed investigation into the facts and conclusion reached on the basis of those facts. It may be that the Assistant Collector Central Excise was wrong in approving the classification of Ossopan under T-H. 02.01. However it cannot be said that the Assistant Collector Central Excise did not consider the relevant material or that there was any suppression of fact. The Tribunal's opinion on the non-applicability of the extended period of limitation is accordingly upheld. 6. The civil appeals are disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Appeals disposed off.