https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327699 The Court upheld the Commissioner's rejection of the rectification application, stating that Section 74(1) does not allow rectification for self-induced errors. The Division Bench allowed rectification despite an ongoing appeal before CESTAT. The Commissioner's decision to reject the rectification application was upheld due to inconsistencies in the petitioner's submissions. The Court clarified that rectification can only be done for mistakes evident from the record. The Court emphasized it would not interfere unless there was a clear error. The rejection of the waiver application did not dismiss the appeal but allowed collection of the amount demanded. en-us Thu, 03 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Sep 2016 15:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327699 The Court upheld the Commissioner's rejection of the rectification application, stating that Section 74(1) does not allow rectification for self-induced errors. The Division Bench allowed rectification despite an ongoing appeal before CESTAT. The Commissioner's decision to reject the rectification application was upheld due to inconsistencies in the petitioner's submissions. The Court clarified that rectification can only be done for mistakes evident from the record. The Court emphasized it would not interfere unless there was a clear error. The rejection of the waiver application did not dismiss the appeal but allowed collection of the amount demanded. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 03 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327699