https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257437 Documents produced for the first time in a review or ROM application cannot justify interference unless they show a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal held that the RG-23D extract and invoices relied on by the applicant had not been placed before the original authority, the first appellate authority, or the Tribunal when the earlier order was made, and they did not establish any patent error in that order. A claim of inadequate representation, without identification of a specific apparent mistake, was insufficient. The ROM application was therefore dismissed. en-us Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2015 13:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257437 Documents produced for the first time in a review or ROM application cannot justify interference unless they show a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal held that the RG-23D extract and invoices relied on by the applicant had not been placed before the original authority, the first appellate authority, or the Tribunal when the earlier order was made, and they did not establish any patent error in that order. A claim of inadequate representation, without identification of a specific apparent mistake, was insufficient. The ROM application was therefore dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257437