https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95196 The dominant issue was whether the extended period of limitation was validly invoked for denying exemption, ordering confiscation, and imposing penalties in relation to imported fabrics. Applying the binding Division Bench decision, the Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to satisfy the Supreme Court tests for invoking the extended limitation period, and therefore the impugned adjudication order could not be sustained; the appeals were allowed on limitation. Having decided limitation in favour of the appellant, the Tribunal held it lacked jurisdiction to examine the merits of classification, exemption denial, confiscation, or penalties; consequentially, those demands and actions did not survive. - CESTAT en-us Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:26 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95196 The dominant issue was whether the extended period of limitation was validly invoked for denying exemption, ordering confiscation, and imposing penalties in relation to imported fabrics. Applying the binding Division Bench decision, the Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to satisfy the Supreme Court tests for invoking the extended limitation period, and therefore the impugned adjudication order could not be sustained; the appeals were allowed on limitation. Having decided limitation in favour of the appellant, the Tribunal held it lacked jurisdiction to examine the merits of classification, exemption denial, confiscation, or penalties; consequentially, those demands and actions did not survive. - CESTAT Highlights Customs Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:26 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95196