https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785779 On remand for de novo consideration, the first appellate authority was required to decide the de-bonding dispute afresh on merits, including the 10.05.2019 clarification treating the suo-moto de-bonding order as the final exit date and the applicable exit conditions for the 100% export oriented unit. The appellate order and the Tribunal order were unsustainable because neither addressed the core contention or gave reasons on the material issue. A quasi-judicial authority must apply its mind to the relevant material and issue a reasoned order; mechanical affirmance without considering the dispute merits is invalid. The matter was therefore remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jan 2026 08:55:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785779 On remand for de novo consideration, the first appellate authority was required to decide the de-bonding dispute afresh on merits, including the 10.05.2019 clarification treating the suo-moto de-bonding order as the final exit date and the applicable exit conditions for the 100% export oriented unit. The appellate order and the Tribunal order were unsustainable because neither addressed the core contention or gave reasons on the material issue. A quasi-judicial authority must apply its mind to the relevant material and issue a reasoned order; mechanical affirmance without considering the dispute merits is invalid. The matter was therefore remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785779