https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250624 A rectification application was rejected because no mistake apparent on the record was shown. The Tribunal found that the earlier order had not overlooked Ram Shree Steels (P) Ltd., as no one had appeared for the respondent when that order was passed, and in any event that decision concerned detention of plant and machinery under Rule 230 and its effect on manufacturing activity. It had no bearing on the distinct question whether recovery proceedings under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 were appealable before the Commissioner (Appeals). en-us Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Aug 2014 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250624 A rectification application was rejected because no mistake apparent on the record was shown. The Tribunal found that the earlier order had not overlooked Ram Shree Steels (P) Ltd., as no one had appeared for the respondent when that order was passed, and in any event that decision concerned detention of plant and machinery under Rule 230 and its effect on manufacturing activity. It had no bearing on the distinct question whether recovery proceedings under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 were appealable before the Commissioner (Appeals). Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250624