Tribunal dismisses rectification applications; mistakes not apparent on record.

The Tribunal rejected three rectification of mistake (ROM) applications seeking to rectify a mistake in the final order. The applicants argued that since proceedings against the main appellant were dropped, all co-appellants' appeals should have been allowed, and the lack of cross-examination of witnesses was a mistake. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the contentions, stating that the alleged mistakes were related to the merits of the case and not apparent on the face of the records. Consequently, the applications were dismissed as not valid for rectification.

---

---

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in final order.

Analysis:
The judgment addresses three applications seeking rectification of a mistake in the final order dated 09/03/2018. The applications were filed against the same order that allowed the appeal of M/s.Sofina Fashion but dismissed the three appeals of the present applicants. The applicants argued that since proceedings against the main appellant were dropped, all co-appellants' appeals should have been allowed. They also contended that the lack of cross-examination of witnesses was a mistake in the order. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the applicants' contentions. It was noted that the Tribunal had examined the evidence for each appellant separately and based its decision on that. The issue of cross-examination was deemed not to be a mistake apparent on the face of the records.

The judgment emphasized that a mistake requiring rectification must be apparent on the face of the records and cannot be related to the merits of the case. It was highlighted that issues requiring extensive arguments from both sides do not qualify as mistakes for rectification. The Tribunal rejected all three rectification of mistake (ROM) applications, stating that the alleged mistakes were actually related to the merits of the case. Therefore, the applications were not considered valid for rectification.

---