Tribunal rectifies mistake in Final Order by adjusting values of seized goods, correcting error in adjudication order.

The Tribunal allowed the applications seeking rectification of a mistake in Final Order No. 42811-42821/2017. The error pertained to the incorrect mention of values of goods seized at DXN Puducherry in para-19, which actually related to para-8 of the adjudication order. After acknowledging the mistake, the Tribunal ordered the modification of the Final Order to accurately reflect the values of goods mentioned in specific paras of the adjudication order, thereby rectifying the error apparent on the face of the record.

---

---

Issues: Rectification of mistake in Final Order

Analysis:
The case involves applications seeking rectification of a mistake in Final Order No. 42811-42821/2017. The Revenue filed the applications to rectify an error apparent on the face of the record in the mentioned order. The mistake pertained to the value of goods and the corresponding paras in the adjudication order.

The applicant argued that the Tribunal's final order incorrectly mentioned the value of goods seized at DXN Puducherry in para-19, which actually pertained to para-8 of the adjudication order. The value of goods mentioned in the Order-in-Original No. 04/2005 by the Commissioner was different from what was reflected in the Tribunal's final order. The applicant contended that the error was apparent on the face of the record and required rectification to accurately reflect the values mentioned in the adjudication order.

On the other hand, the respondent's advocate acknowledged that there was indeed an error apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, examined the impugned order and found that the error was in the mention of values and corresponding paras in para-19. The Tribunal noted that the values for paras 5, 6, 7, and 8 were not correctly reflected in the final order, leading to the need for rectification.

In its final decision, the Tribunal ordered the modification of the impugned Final Order to accurately reflect the values of goods mentioned in paras 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the adjudication order. The Tribunal specified the correct values and paras in the modified order to rectify the error apparent on the face of the record. Consequently, the applications for rectification of mistake were allowed in the terms specified by the Tribunal.

---