1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal dismisses rectification applications due to applicant's failure to disclose legal challenges.</h1> The Tribunal dismissed M/s Sukalp Agencies' applications for rectification of a mistake in a Final Order, as the applicant had failed to disclose that the ... Rectification of mistake - Held that: - there is no whisper that the applicant has agitated the matter before Hon'ble High Court and subsequently before Hon'ble Supreme Court - the applicant have not come before this Tribunal with clean hands and have resorted to the suppression of facts - the ROM and COD applications are dismissed. Issues: Rectification of mistake in Final Order, Compliance with Tribunal's Order, Suppression of facts by the applicantThe judgment pertains to applications filed by M/s Sukalp Agencies for rectification of a mistake in Final Order No.55868-55870/2013 dated 19th March, 2013 in Central Excise Appeal No. 2497 to 2499/2005. The Tribunal had partially allowed the appeal, remanding part of the demand while setting aside another part. The applicant filed the rectification application after more than three years. The Tribunal directed the Revenue's representative to provide a report on the status of re-adjudication proceedings and compliance with the earlier Final Order. The report indicated that no re-adjudication had been done, and no further hearings or notices were issued to the applicant. It was noted that the Final Order had been challenged in the Allahabad High Court and subsequently in the Supreme Court, with both courts upholding the Tribunal's decision. However, the applicant had not disclosed this information to the Tribunal, leading to a finding that the applicant had not approached the Tribunal with clean hands and had suppressed facts. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the applications for rectification.