Section 129D explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Section 129D lets the department review its own adjudication orders. A Committee of Principal Chief Commissioners or Chief Commissioners can review a decision of a Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs, and a Principal Commissioner or Commissioner can review the decision of a subordinate adjudicating authority. Each can direct an application to the Appellate Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals). This article follows the text on the CBIC portal updated to 30 March 2022.
A Committee may, of its own motion, call for the record of a decision by a Principal Commissioner or Commissioner as adjudicating authority, and direct a Commissioner to apply to the Appellate Tribunal. A Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may do the same for a subordinate adjudicating authority, directing an application to the Commissioner (Appeals). The order must be made within three months of communication (the Board may extend by thirty days), and the application must follow within one month. Section 129DA is printed as omitted.
The text consulted is the CBIC copy last updated on 30 March 2022 (the Act as amended up to the Finance Act, 2022). Later Finance Acts are not in that copy; check any later change to section 129D before acting.
Why this section matters to a taxpayer
This is the department's route of review, but a person who has won an adjudication order can find it challenged here. If you hold an order and want to understand what a review may mean, our legal dispute resolution team can help. The copy prints section 129D with joined words ("callfor", "Commissionerof"); the text is read as intended.
The footnotes record that the Committee replaced "Board" as the reviewing body by the Finance Act, 2005 (18 of 2005), with effect from 13.05.2005, and that the designations of the officers were substituted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 (25 of 2014), with effect from 06.08.2014.
Sub-section (1): review by the Committee
The Committee of Principal Chief Commissioners of Customs or Chief Commissioners of Customs "may, of its own motion, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which a Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs as an adjudicating authority has passed any decision or order under this Act for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such decision or order". It may then "by order, direct such Commissioner or any other Commissioner to apply to the Appellate Tribunal for the determination of such points arising out of the decision or order as may be specified" in its order.
Points to note:
- The review is "of its own motion".
- It covers decisions or orders of a Principal Commissioner or Commissioner as adjudicating authority.
- The test is "legality or propriety".
- The direction is to apply to the Appellate Tribunal, on points specified in the Committee's order. The words "or any other Commissioner" were inserted by the Finance Act, 2001 (14 of 2001), with effect from 11.05.2001, per the footnote.
The proviso. Where the Committee differs in its opinion as to legality or propriety, it states the points of difference and makes a reference to the Board. The Board, after considering the facts, if of the opinion that the decision or order "is not legal or proper", may by order direct such Commissioner or any other Commissioner to apply to the Appellate Tribunal on the points specified. The proviso was inserted by the Finance Act, 2008 (18 of 2008), with effect from 10.05.2008, as the footnote prints.
Sub-section (2): review by the Commissioner
The Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs "may, of his own motion, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which an adjudicating authority subordinate to him has passed any decision or order under this Act for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of any such decision or order and may, by order, direct such authority or any officer of Customs subordinate to him to apply to the Commissioner (Appeals) for the determination of such points arising out of the decision or order as may be specified". The words "such authority or any officer of Customs subordinate to him" were substituted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2006 (29 of 2006), with effect from 13.07.2006, per the footnote.
| Feature | Sub-section (1) | Sub-section (2) |
|---|---|---|
| Who reviews | Committee of Principal Chief Commissioners or Chief Commissioners | Principal Commissioner or Commissioner |
| Whose order | A Principal Commissioner or Commissioner as adjudicating authority | An adjudicating authority subordinate to the reviewer |
| Test | Legality or propriety | Legality or propriety |
| Application goes to | The Appellate Tribunal | The Commissioner (Appeals) |
Sub-sections (3) and (4): time limits
Order within three months. Every order under sub-section (1) or (2) "shall be made within a period of three months from the date of communication of the decision or order of the adjudicating authority". The proviso lets the Board, "on sufficient cause being shown", extend the period "by another thirty days". Sub-section (3) was substituted by the Finance Act, 2008, with effect from 10.05.2008, and the proviso was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014, with effect from 06.08.2014, per the footnotes.
Application within one month. Where, in pursuance of such an order, the adjudicating authority or an officer authorised by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner makes an application to the Appellate Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals) "within a period of one month from the date of communication of the order under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) to the adjudicating authority", the application "shall be heard by the Appellate Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals), as the case may be, as if such application were an appeal made against the decision or order of the adjudicating authority". The provisions of the Act regarding appeals, "including the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 129A", apply so far as may be. The footnote records that "one month" replaced "three months" by the Finance Act, 2007 (22 of 2007), with effect from 11.05.2007.
So there are two clocks: three months (extendable by thirty days) for the review order, and one month from communication of that order to the adjudicating authority for the application. Sub-section (4) brings in section 129A(4), which allows the respondent to file cross-objections within forty-five days of notice; see our article on section 129A.
Example with invented names: the Principal Commissioner passes an adjudication order in favour of Dhruv Fabrics Ltd. Within three months of communication, the Committee calls for the record, forms the view that the order is not legal or proper, and directs a Commissioner to apply to the Appellate Tribunal on specified points. The application, if made within one month of communication of the Committee's order to the adjudicating authority, is heard as if it were an appeal, and Dhruv Fabrics may file cross-objections as section 129A(4) allows.
Sub-section (5) is printed as omitted.
Section 129DA
The copy consulted prints section 129DA only as a heading with omitted words (" "). The footnote says that the section was inserted by section 5 of the Customs and Central Excise Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988 (with effect from 01.07.1988), and that the Act was repealed by the Customs and Central Excise Laws (Repeal) Act, 2004 (25 of 2004) before it was brought into force. This article says nothing more about it.
How it fits with the appeal route
Our articles on section 128A and section 129B describe what the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal do with an application once it reaches them. For a general view see Customs appeal process: Commissioner (Appeals), CESTAT and the High Court.
Practical points
- If you hold a favourable adjudication order, note the three months (plus thirty days if the Board extends) for a review order and the one month for the application.
- If an application reaches the Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals), treat it as an appeal and respond, including by cross-objections where available.
- Keep the adjudication record complete, since the reviewing authority will examine "the record of any proceeding".
Need help responding to a departmental review?
A review order and a departmental application can reopen an order you thought final, and the clocks run from communication. Our team can help you review the papers and plan your response through legal dispute resolution for customs matters. See also how to file a customs appeal before CESTAT.
Key takeaways
- A Committee may review a Principal Commissioner's or Commissioner's adjudication order of its own motion and direct an application to the Appellate Tribunal.
- A Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may review a subordinate adjudicating authority's order and direct an application to the Commissioner (Appeals).
- The review order must be made within three months of communication, extendable by the Board by thirty days; the application follows within one month.
- Such an application is heard as if it were an appeal.
- Section 129DA is printed as omitted.
Read next
- Section 129DD: revision by Central Government
- Sections 129E and 129EE: pre-deposit for appeal and interest on its refund
- Section 129C: procedure and benches of the Appellate Tribunal
- Customs appeals: Commissioner (Appeals) and CESTAT
Disclaimer: Based on the Customs Act, 1962 as published on the CBIC Tax Information Portal, updated to 30 March 2022 (amended up to the Finance Act, 2022), as consulted on 2 October 2026. Finance Acts of 2023 and later, and the current rules, regulations and notifications, should be checked. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.