<?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 691 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116200</link>
    <description>Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act is limited to obvious errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen the merits of marketability, excisability or dutiability. The Tribunal held that mere non-consideration of the cited Supreme Court decision in Rishi Gases Limited, by itself, did not amount to such an apparent mistake. On that basis, the rectification application was found not maintainable and was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:02:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153198" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 691 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116200</link>
      <description>Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act is limited to obvious errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen the merits of marketability, excisability or dutiability. The Tribunal held that mere non-consideration of the cited Supreme Court decision in Rishi Gases Limited, by itself, did not amount to such an apparent mistake. On that basis, the rectification application was found not maintainable and was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116200</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>