https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439683 Limitation objections were treated as unavailable because the earlier round of litigation had attained finality, no challenge had been made to the later show cause notice, and the subsequent de novo adjudication proceeded in accordance with prior directions under the doctrine of merger. On merits, the project contract covered import of capital goods, but two items remained unimported and the appellant could not claim concurrent exemption contrary to the project import framework. The differential duty demand was therefore sustained, with the challenge failing on both limitation and merits. en-us Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Jun 2023 00:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439683 Limitation objections were treated as unavailable because the earlier round of litigation had attained finality, no challenge had been made to the later show cause notice, and the subsequent de novo adjudication proceeded in accordance with prior directions under the doctrine of merger. On merits, the project contract covered import of capital goods, but two items remained unimported and the appellant could not claim concurrent exemption contrary to the project import framework. The differential duty demand was therefore sustained, with the challenge failing on both limitation and merits. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439683