https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785344 In a classification dispute over optical ground wire fibre optic cable, the extended limitation period was held inapplicable because the matter turned on interpretation and no suppression was shown. The Tribunal noted the long-standing litigation, the Board circular requiring verification, and the Department's earlier acceptance of an identical test report, which weakened any allegation of concealment. For the normal period demand, the confirmed duty was set aside because no samples were drawn and no contemporaneous testing was done for the consignments in dispute; a test report for one consignment could not be applied to others without proper verification. The Tribunal therefore granted relief to the importer while not finally deciding the substantive classification issue. en-us Tue, 20 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Jan 2026 08:41:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785344 In a classification dispute over optical ground wire fibre optic cable, the extended limitation period was held inapplicable because the matter turned on interpretation and no suppression was shown. The Tribunal noted the long-standing litigation, the Board circular requiring verification, and the Department's earlier acceptance of an identical test report, which weakened any allegation of concealment. For the normal period demand, the confirmed duty was set aside because no samples were drawn and no contemporaneous testing was done for the consignments in dispute; a test report for one consignment could not be applied to others without proper verification. The Tribunal therefore granted relief to the importer while not finally deciding the substantive classification issue. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 20 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785344