https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782846 The CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal of the importer using transferred DFIA licences and set aside the impugned demand of customs duty. It held that the extended limitation under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 can be invoked only in cases of collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts by the importer/noticee. As the SCN contained no such specific allegation or supporting evidence against the appellant, the preconditions for invoking the extended period were not met. Relying on precedent distinguishing void and voidable licences, the Tribunal held that Revenue could not demand duty foregone on utilisation of the transferred DFIA scrips. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Dec 2025 08:12:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782846 The CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal of the importer using transferred DFIA licences and set aside the impugned demand of customs duty. It held that the extended limitation under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 can be invoked only in cases of collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts by the importer/noticee. As the SCN contained no such specific allegation or supporting evidence against the appellant, the preconditions for invoking the extended period were not met. Relying on precedent distinguishing void and voidable licences, the Tribunal held that Revenue could not demand duty foregone on utilisation of the transferred DFIA scrips. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782846