https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77211 Questions on limitation under section 11B, refund based on duty paid under protest, and admission of additional evidence were not treated as arising from the rectification order because they related to the merits decided earlier. The claim that the refund was consequential to the earlier Tribunal order was also not accepted, as that contention had not been shown to have been raised previously and the earlier order was understood to have remanded the matter for a different period. The purported error was therefore regarded as debatable rather than a mistake apparent on the face of the record, and no referable question of law or rectifiable mistake was established. en-us Wed, 26 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77211 Questions on limitation under section 11B, refund based on duty paid under protest, and admission of additional evidence were not treated as arising from the rectification order because they related to the merits decided earlier. The claim that the refund was consequential to the earlier Tribunal order was also not accepted, as that contention had not been shown to have been raised previously and the earlier order was understood to have remanded the matter for a different period. The purported error was therefore regarded as debatable rather than a mistake apparent on the face of the record, and no referable question of law or rectifiable mistake was established. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77211