Appellate tribunal allows appeal on duty amount correction, emphasizing typographical error rectification.

The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the revenue, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order. It emphasized that the rectification of a typographical error in the duty amount was not a review order but a correction that the Assistant Commissioner could make at any time. The tribunal highlighted that the original show cause notice correctly stated the duty amount, and the Assistant Commissioner's order confirmed this amount without any discussion on reducing it. Therefore, the rectification of the typographical error was deemed permissible by the tribunal.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Rectification of typographical error in duty amount by Assistant Commissioner after 1.5 years of order issuance.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Rectification of Typographical Error
The case involved a show cause notice where a demand of duty of Rs. 1,36,089.91 was raised against the respondents. However, in the order issued by the Assistant Commissioner, a typographical error occurred, stating the duty amount as Rs. 13,856.70 instead of the correct amount. The error was later rectified through a corrigendum issued after approximately 1.5 years, correcting the mistake and clarifying that the duty amount should be read as Rs. 1,36,089.91. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the corrigendum, stating that the Assistant Commissioner did not have the authority to enhance duty after such a period. The appellate tribunal noted that the corrigendum was not a review order but a rectification of a typographical error. The tribunal observed that the original show cause notice clearly indicated the correct duty amount, and the Assistant Commissioner's order confirmed the entire notice without any discussion on reducing the duty. Therefore, the tribunal concluded that the rectification of the typographical error was permissible at any time by the Assistant Commissioner.

Decision:
The appellate tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowed the appeal filed by the revenue, emphasizing that the rectification of a typographical error in the duty amount did not constitute a review order but a correction of a mistake that could be done by the Assistant Commissioner at any point in time.

---