<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (6) TMI 834 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329125</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s application for rectification of the Final Order, stating that the alleged mistake was not apparent on the record and did not meet the criteria for rectification. The Tribunal emphasized that rectification should only be for obvious mistakes, not debatable points of law, and upheld the principle established by the Supreme Court that once an order is delivered, it cannot be debated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2016 09:53:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432517" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 834 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329125</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s application for rectification of the Final Order, stating that the alleged mistake was not apparent on the record and did not meet the criteria for rectification. The Tribunal emphasized that rectification should only be for obvious mistakes, not debatable points of law, and upheld the principle established by the Supreme Court that once an order is delivered, it cannot be debated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>