https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117179 A subsequent budgetary amendment and any alleged withdrawal of a Board circular could not support rectification where those points were not raised during the original hearing. The Tribunal held that a later change in law or administration does not, by itself, create a mistake apparent on the face of the record in an earlier final order. Because no corresponding submission or relevant amendment had been advanced when the appeal was decided, the rectification plea failed. The application was therefore not maintainable on the ground urged and was rejected. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:19:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117179 A subsequent budgetary amendment and any alleged withdrawal of a Board circular could not support rectification where those points were not raised during the original hearing. The Tribunal held that a later change in law or administration does not, by itself, create a mistake apparent on the face of the record in an earlier final order. Because no corresponding submission or relevant amendment had been advanced when the appeal was decided, the rectification plea failed. The application was therefore not maintainable on the ground urged and was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117179