https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781238 CESTAT Chennai (AT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the SCN barred by limitation under s.28 Customs Act. The tribunal found departmental classification of the goods was ambiguous (8529 vs 8528 vs 8473) and Board guidance later clarified classification to 85287100, demonstrating lack of clarity during the relevant period. Citing HC and SC precedent that time-barred demands need not be adjudicated on merits, the tribunal declined to examine substantive issues. en-us Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Nov 2025 08:14:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781238 CESTAT Chennai (AT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the SCN barred by limitation under s.28 Customs Act. The tribunal found departmental classification of the goods was ambiguous (8529 vs 8528 vs 8473) and Board guidance later clarified classification to 85287100, demonstrating lack of clarity during the relevant period. Citing HC and SC precedent that time-barred demands need not be adjudicated on merits, the tribunal declined to examine substantive issues. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781238