https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783616 The dominant issue was whether the extended period of limitation could validly be invoked to sustain the demand and consequential confiscation and penalties relating to alleged misclassification and denial of exemption under an import notification. Applying the binding Tribunal precedent which, following SC jurisprudence on extended limitation, held that the Revenue failed to satisfy the requisite tests for invoking the larger period, the impugned order was treated as unsustainable on limitation. In line with the further principle that once limitation is decided in favour of the importer the Tribunal should not enter into merits, the appeals were allowed on limitation and the impugned order stood set aside. en-us Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783616 The dominant issue was whether the extended period of limitation could validly be invoked to sustain the demand and consequential confiscation and penalties relating to alleged misclassification and denial of exemption under an import notification. Applying the binding Tribunal precedent which, following SC jurisprudence on extended limitation, held that the Revenue failed to satisfy the requisite tests for invoking the larger period, the impugned order was treated as unsustainable on limitation. In line with the further principle that once limitation is decided in favour of the importer the Tribunal should not enter into merits, the appeals were allowed on limitation and the impugned order stood set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783616