https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93565 The Tribunal acknowledged a mistake in its Final Order regarding two appeals, one from M/s. Mafatlal Fine Spg. and Mfg. Co. and the other from Bombay Dyg. Mfg. Co. Ltd. The issue of combing facility availability was contested, leading to a remand order for a fresh decision. The Tribunal directed separate orders for each case, ensuring a fair assessment by examining all contentions raised and granting both parties a personal hearing opportunity. The Review of Order Mechanism was allowed for de novo adjudication, aiming to rectify the initial mistake and provide a decision on merits. en-us Tue, 09 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:25:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93565 The Tribunal acknowledged a mistake in its Final Order regarding two appeals, one from M/s. Mafatlal Fine Spg. and Mfg. Co. and the other from Bombay Dyg. Mfg. Co. Ltd. The issue of combing facility availability was contested, leading to a remand order for a fresh decision. The Tribunal directed separate orders for each case, ensuring a fair assessment by examining all contentions raised and granting both parties a personal hearing opportunity. The Review of Order Mechanism was allowed for de novo adjudication, aiming to rectify the initial mistake and provide a decision on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93565