<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (3) TMI 638 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115978</link>
    <description>A rectification of mistake application was held not maintainable where the applicant challenged a discrepancy between the duty figure in the final order and the amount stated in the show cause notice. The quantified difference, after adjudication on both sides, was not treated as an apparent error because it did not disclose a patent mistake on the face of the record. The request therefore fell outside the limited scope of rectification and was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:54:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152976" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 638 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115978</link>
      <description>A rectification of mistake application was held not maintainable where the applicant challenged a discrepancy between the duty figure in the final order and the amount stated in the show cause notice. The quantified difference, after adjudication on both sides, was not treated as an apparent error because it did not disclose a patent mistake on the face of the record. The request therefore fell outside the limited scope of rectification and was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115978</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>