https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328799 A clerical or typographical error in the non-operative part of an order may be corrected without disturbing the substantive decision where the correction only substitutes the correct appeal particulars and underlying order references. Such a correction is not a rectification of the order under section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, because it does not seek rehearing on merits or amendment of the operative portion. The Tribunal may instead act under Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982 to give effect to its orders and secure the ends of justice, so the limitation objection under section 35C(2) was rejected. en-us Tue, 03 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328799 A clerical or typographical error in the non-operative part of an order may be corrected without disturbing the substantive decision where the correction only substitutes the correct appeal particulars and underlying order references. Such a correction is not a rectification of the order under section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, because it does not seek rehearing on merits or amendment of the operative portion. The Tribunal may instead act under Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982 to give effect to its orders and secure the ends of justice, so the limitation objection under section 35C(2) was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328799