Tribunal denies rectification applications, emphasizing accuracy in order dictation

The Tribunal rejected applications seeking rectification of a mistake claimed to be apparent in its order dated 13th December 2017, which upheld a Commissioner's order from 2008. The Tribunal noted a discrepancy in the date of decision mentioned in the rectification application compared to its actual order. Emphasizing the need to rectify mistakes during order dictation, the Tribunal found no grounds to entertain the rectification applications, ultimately rejecting them. The judgment was delivered on 17/12/2018.

---

---

Issues: Rectification of mistake in the order of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai dated 13th December 2017

The judgment addresses the applications seeking rectification of a mistake claimed to be apparent in the order of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai dated 13th December 2017. The order in question upheld the order-in-original no. 44/C.Ex/Commr/2008 dated 07th October 2008 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Aurangabad. The Tribunal noted that the application for rectification of mistake contained a ground indicating an erroneous date of decision, which did not align with the actual date recorded in the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal emphasized that any mistakes should have been rectified at the time of dictation of the order in Court, and failure to do so precludes a plea against deficiency in the findings of the Tribunal. Consequently, the Tribunal found no reason to entertain the applications for rectification of mistake and rejected them. The judgment was pronounced in Court on 17/12/2018.

In this judgment, the main issue revolved around rectification of a mistake claimed to be apparent in the order of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai dated 13th December 2017. The Tribunal carefully analyzed the application for rectification of mistake, which highlighted a discrepancy in the date of decision mentioned in the ground of the application compared to the actual date recorded in the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of rectifying any mistakes at the time of dictation of the order in Court, and pointed out that failure to do so would preclude a subsequent plea against any deficiencies in the Tribunal's findings. Based on these considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the applications for rectification of mistake could not be entertained and were therefore rejected. The judgment was pronounced in Court on 17/12/2018.

In summary, the judgment dealt with the issue of rectification of mistake in the order of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai dated 13th December 2017. The Tribunal examined the discrepancy in the date of decision mentioned in the application for rectification compared to the actual date recorded in the Tribunal's order. Emphasizing the importance of rectifying mistakes at the time of dictation of the order in Court, the Tribunal concluded that the applications for rectification of mistake could not be entertained and were rejected. The judgment was pronounced in Court on 17/12/2018.

---