Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the departmental review order under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 was passed within the prescribed period of three months from the date of communication of the adjudicating order, and whether the dismissal of the departmental appeals as time-barred required interference.
Analysis: Section 129D(3) requires the review order to be made within three months from the date of communication of the decision or order of the adjudicating authority. The controversy turned on the actual date on which the Orders-in-Original were received by the reviewing authority. The record before the Commissioner (Appeals) did not establish the receipt date, despite repeated requests for the original files, and the Tribunal found no satisfactory basis to reject that finding. The date seals produced before the Tribunal were found suspect and insufficient to dislodge the conclusion that the review orders were belated. The Tribunal also emphasised that proceedings before it are judicial proceedings and that the department must act with due seriousness and candour.
Conclusion: The review orders were not shown to have been passed within the statutory period, and the dismissal of the departmental appeals as time-barred was upheld.
Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were sustained and the departmental appeals failed on limitation.
Ratio Decidendi: For departmental review under Section 129D(3) of the Customs Act, 1962, the limitation period runs from the date of communication of the adjudicating order, and where the receipt date is not proved, the finding of delay cannot be disturbed.