https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776967 CESTAT NEW DELHI - AT noted a typographical error in a reference but held that reliance on a CESTAT KOLKATA decision was misplaced and that the final order dated 10.02.2025 had relied on a binding judgment of the DELHI HC. The registry must clarify why the appeal was listed before this Bench. The application for adjournment filed was refused, and because the final order was not expressly recalled by the Kolkata Bench on 19.06.2025, there is no reason to rehear the customs appeal. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Aug 2025 08:33:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776967 CESTAT NEW DELHI - AT noted a typographical error in a reference but held that reliance on a CESTAT KOLKATA decision was misplaced and that the final order dated 10.02.2025 had relied on a binding judgment of the DELHI HC. The registry must clarify why the appeal was listed before this Bench. The application for adjournment filed was refused, and because the final order was not expressly recalled by the Kolkata Bench on 19.06.2025, there is no reason to rehear the customs appeal. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 14 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776967