https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109916 Rectification was unavailable because no apparent mistake of fact or law was shown in the Tribunal's final order. The order had proceeded on the basis that a duty demand for alleged breach of export obligations could not be sustained without proper sanction or authorisation from the Development Commissioner under the applicable circular. A communication from the Assistant Development Commissioner was insufficient to constitute the required permission to initiate recovery proceedings. A later order from the Development Commissioner also recorded that the breach proceedings had been dropped, with no shortfall in NFEP and no breach of the relevant norms. The rectification application therefore failed on merits. en-us Fri, 08 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:47:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109916 Rectification was unavailable because no apparent mistake of fact or law was shown in the Tribunal's final order. The order had proceeded on the basis that a duty demand for alleged breach of export obligations could not be sustained without proper sanction or authorisation from the Development Commissioner under the applicable circular. A communication from the Assistant Development Commissioner was insufficient to constitute the required permission to initiate recovery proceedings. A later order from the Development Commissioner also recorded that the breach proceedings had been dropped, with no shortfall in NFEP and no breach of the relevant norms. The rectification application therefore failed on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109916