https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87472 Rectification of a final order was refused because no mistake apparent on the face of the record was shown. The appellant's own appeal materials proceeded on the basis that the specified goods were captively used within the factory, while the departmental case was that black tea and packet tea were manufactured in different units and did not qualify for the concession under Notification No. 217/86. The order had been dictated in court in the presence of counsel, and no cross-objection was filed. On these facts, the request for rectification was correctly rejected and no relief was granted. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:22:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87472 Rectification of a final order was refused because no mistake apparent on the face of the record was shown. The appellant's own appeal materials proceeded on the basis that the specified goods were captively used within the factory, while the departmental case was that black tea and packet tea were manufactured in different units and did not qualify for the concession under Notification No. 217/86. The order had been dictated in court in the presence of counsel, and no cross-objection was filed. On these facts, the request for rectification was correctly rejected and no relief was granted. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87472