https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173178 Review jurisdiction is confined to narrow grounds, including discovery of new material or an error apparent on the face of the record. The earlier judgment was said to have omitted consideration of the original authority's finding that overall foreign exchange earnings had to be counted towards discharge of export obligation, and there was no adjudication on that point. It was also said to have overlooked that the importer's success before the Tribunal rested on Section 66(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, a basis not determinative of liability under the Customs Act. The judgment under review was therefore treated as vitiated by an error apparent on the face of the record and fit to be recalled. en-us Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Sep 2015 15:57:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173178 Review jurisdiction is confined to narrow grounds, including discovery of new material or an error apparent on the face of the record. The earlier judgment was said to have omitted consideration of the original authority's finding that overall foreign exchange earnings had to be counted towards discharge of export obligation, and there was no adjudication on that point. It was also said to have overlooked that the importer's success before the Tribunal rested on Section 66(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, a basis not determinative of liability under the Customs Act. The judgment under review was therefore treated as vitiated by an error apparent on the face of the record and fit to be recalled. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173178