https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152212 The Tribunal corrected an earlier final order to align the recorded finding with the exemption analysis actually applied. The disputed sentence had wrongly suggested that the inputs were the goods on which additional duty of excise was not leviable for captive consumption, whereas the Tribunal had proceeded on the basis that the final products were the relevant goods for that exemption issue. The correction did not alter the substantive reasoning; it only revised the wording so the order accurately reflected the intended finding. The correction application was allowed. en-us Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:21:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152212 The Tribunal corrected an earlier final order to align the recorded finding with the exemption analysis actually applied. The disputed sentence had wrongly suggested that the inputs were the goods on which additional duty of excise was not leviable for captive consumption, whereas the Tribunal had proceeded on the basis that the final products were the relevant goods for that exemption issue. The correction did not alter the substantive reasoning; it only revised the wording so the order accurately reflected the intended finding. The correction application was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152212