https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118156 The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh order in compliance with the law. The tribunal found jurisdictional errors in the issuance of a corrigendum without the power of review, leading to the impugned order being set aside. The original demand for anti-dumping duty was sustained, emphasizing the need for the original authority to provide a valid reason for the delay in passing the order. Compliance with Section 28(2A) of the Customs Act, 1962 was also highlighted, with the tribunal directing the Commissioner (Appeals) to issue a fresh order adhering to legal requirements. en-us Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:44:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118156 The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh order in compliance with the law. The tribunal found jurisdictional errors in the issuance of a corrigendum without the power of review, leading to the impugned order being set aside. The original demand for anti-dumping duty was sustained, emphasizing the need for the original authority to provide a valid reason for the delay in passing the order. Compliance with Section 28(2A) of the Customs Act, 1962 was also highlighted, with the tribunal directing the Commissioner (Appeals) to issue a fresh order adhering to legal requirements. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118156