https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782706 The CESTAT allowed the importer's appeal, holding that Customs wrongly invoked the extended period of limitation for duty recovery. Relying on the principle that the onus lies on Revenue to justify reclassification under a more specific tariff entry, the Tribunal found that Customs had led no evidence to discharge this burden. From the clear description in the bills of entry, there was neither suppression nor misstatement by the importer. Consequently, the conditions for extended limitation were not met. The impugned order was set aside without examining the merits of tariff classification. en-us Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782706 The CESTAT allowed the importer's appeal, holding that Customs wrongly invoked the extended period of limitation for duty recovery. Relying on the principle that the onus lies on Revenue to justify reclassification under a more specific tariff entry, the Tribunal found that Customs had led no evidence to discharge this burden. From the clear description in the bills of entry, there was neither suppression nor misstatement by the importer. Consequently, the conditions for extended limitation were not met. The impugned order was set aside without examining the merits of tariff classification. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782706