https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107352 An adjudication order was treated as vitiated where the authority named in the body of the order differed from the authority shown as having signed it, and the record did not contain the corrigendum relied upon by the Revenue. The challenge also raised concerns about the voluntariness of a statement and the absence of corroborative material to establish abetment. In these circumstances, the matter was remanded to the competent customs authority for de novo consideration, with a full opportunity of hearing to the appellant. en-us Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Mar 2012 17:52:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107352 An adjudication order was treated as vitiated where the authority named in the body of the order differed from the authority shown as having signed it, and the record did not contain the corrigendum relied upon by the Revenue. The challenge also raised concerns about the voluntariness of a statement and the absence of corroborative material to establish abetment. In these circumstances, the matter was remanded to the competent customs authority for de novo consideration, with a full opportunity of hearing to the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107352