https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776328 The SC dismissed the appeal due to lack of sufficient cause to condone the 248-day delay in filing. The CESTAT's decision to set aside the differential duty demand by reclassifying the imported goods under CTH 2710 instead of 2709 was upheld. The classification under CTH 2710 was found unsustainable, and the benefit under the relevant notification was affirmed. No suppression of facts was established, and the extended limitation period was not applicable. en-us Mon, 04 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Aug 2025 05:20:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776328 The SC dismissed the appeal due to lack of sufficient cause to condone the 248-day delay in filing. The CESTAT's decision to set aside the differential duty demand by reclassifying the imported goods under CTH 2710 instead of 2709 was upheld. The classification under CTH 2710 was found unsustainable, and the benefit under the relevant notification was affirmed. No suppression of facts was established, and the extended limitation period was not applicable. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 04 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776328