We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic • Quick overview summary answering your query with references• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced • Includes everything in Basic • Detailed report covering: - Overview Summary - Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars] - Relevant Case Laws - Tariff / Classification / HSN - Expert views from TaxTMI - Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
<h1>Rectification of Order Granted by Appellate Tribunal</h1> The application for rectification of a mistake in the order was granted by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI. The correct order number was confirmed as ... ROM application - rectification of mistake in order - correction of preambleROM application - rectification of mistake in order - correction of preamble - Application for rectification of a mistaken reference in the preamble of the Tribunal's order dated 30.11.2017. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal considered the Revenue's submission that the final order dated 30.11.2017 incorrectly referred to 'Order-in-Appeal No. AV(119)/95/2013 dated 25.4.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Aurangabad' instead of the correct reference 'Order-in-original No. 34/CEX/COMMR/2013 dated 18.10.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Aurangabad'. On perusal of the impugned order, the Tribunal found that the reference in the preamble was a mistake and that correction was necessary to reflect the true originating order. The Tribunal therefore allowed the ROM application and directed that the preamble be read with the corrected order reference. [Paras 4, 5]ROM application allowed; the preamble of the order dated 30.11.2017 is corrected to refer to 'Order-in-original No. 34/CEX/COMMR/2013 dated 18.10.2013'.Final Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the ROM application and rectified the clerical mistake in the preamble of its order dated 30.11.2017 by substituting the incorrect reference with the correct originating order reference. The application was for rectification of a mistake in the order dated 30.11.2017. The correct order number should be 'Order-in-Original No. 34/CEX/COMMR/2013 dated 18.10.2013.' The correction was made, and the ROM application was allowed. (Judgement: Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI, Citation: 2018 (6) TMI 984 - CESTAT MUMBAI)
TaxTMI 
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
