https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757941 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, concluding that the demand for differential duty was time-barred due to the absence of fraud or suppression of facts by the Appellant during import. The limitation issue rendered the impugned orders unsustainable, leading to the annulment of the duty demand and penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act. Consequently, any consequential relief was granted per the law. The classification issue of spectrometers was not addressed, as the limitation aspect was decisive in the outcome. en-us Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Sep 2024 07:49:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757941 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, concluding that the demand for differential duty was time-barred due to the absence of fraud or suppression of facts by the Appellant during import. The limitation issue rendered the impugned orders unsustainable, leading to the annulment of the duty demand and penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act. Consequently, any consequential relief was granted per the law. The classification issue of spectrometers was not addressed, as the limitation aspect was decisive in the outcome. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757941