Natural justice and demand re-determination clarified in Tribunal order, with no real inconsistency found in limitation findings.

The Tribunal found no real inconsistency in its majority conclusion on limitation and quantification of duty demand, as the demand had already been treated as not time-barred. It therefore declined to treat the application as showing an apparent error requiring substantive rectification, but it clarified the operative portion to state that the quantum of demand must be re-determined in accordance with the earlier directions, after issuance of show cause notice and in observance of natural justice. The result was a clarification of the final order rather than acceptance of any material ambiguity.

---

---

Issues: Whether para 34 of the Tribunal's final order required rectification or amplification to clarify that the demand, though held not time-barred, was also to be re-determined in accordance with the directions already issued and after observance of natural justice.

Analysis: The application pointed to an alleged ambiguity in the wording of the majority conclusion on limitation and quantification of demand. It was held that there was no real incongruity between the individual opinions and the majority paragraph, since the demand had been treated as valid in the sense of being not barred by limitation. To remove any doubt, the operative paragraph was nonetheless amplified to state that the quantum of demand should be re-determined as directed earlier, after issue of show cause notice and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

Conclusion: The request for rectification on the basis of apparent error was not accepted as creating any real ambiguity, but the final order was clarified by adding the direction regarding re-determination of the quantum of demand; the application was disposed of accordingly.

---