TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Issue of corrigendum subsequent to adjudication order passed by departmental authorities - Advice sought from Law Ministry - regarding
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... While reviewing an Order-in-Original passed by a Commissioner, it was observed that the said Commissioner made substantive changes in his order by issuing a corrigendum nearly 10 months after issue of the order-in-original. It was felt, prima facie, that the substantive changes brought about by the corrigendum may be beyond the scope of Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 and may thus not stand ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, vide his order dated 16.10.98 adjudicated the matter and passed the orders as can be seen at pages 23-24 of his order placed in the file. Subsequently, almost after 10 months, he has issued a corrigendum wherein the rate of duty and penalty indicated in the earlier order were substituted. Now, the question for consideration us whether this is a valid order. 3. Admittedly, Commissioner of Cus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that….. "on the other hand, authorities or bodies which are given jurisdiction by statutory provisions to deal with the rights of citizens, may be required by the relevant statute to act judicially in dealing with matters entrusted to them. An obligation to act judicially may, in some cases, be inferred from the scheme of the relevant statute and its material provisions. In such a case, it is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said authority or body, the other relevant circumstances……" 4. Commissioner of Customs is no doubt a quasi-judicial body required to work within the provisions of law. Neither the powers of review nor correction to the order is available under the Customs Act to the Commissioner of Customs to exercise such powers. He becomes functions officio after signing the adjudication order and, there....