https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338558 A clerical mistake apparent from the record in the preamble of an earlier final order, relating to the number and date of the order-in-original, was rectified because it did not affect the substance of the decision. Requests to revisit findings on clandestine removal, MODVAT eligibility, limitation, and natural justice were rejected because rectification proceedings cannot be used as a review, and the Tribunal became functus officio after passing the earlier order. Only the typographical correction was allowed; the attempt to reopen the merits was declined. en-us Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:15:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338558 A clerical mistake apparent from the record in the preamble of an earlier final order, relating to the number and date of the order-in-original, was rectified because it did not affect the substance of the decision. Requests to revisit findings on clandestine removal, MODVAT eligibility, limitation, and natural justice were rejected because rectification proceedings cannot be used as a review, and the Tribunal became functus officio after passing the earlier order. Only the typographical correction was allowed; the attempt to reopen the merits was declined. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338558