https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190145 The Tribunal allowed rectification of its earlier final order after finding apparent clerical errors in the attribution of parties and the sequence of proceedings, and directed specific textual substitutions in multiple paragraphs. The corrected record reflects that Revenue had sought stay of the Commissioner (Appeals) order, but the stay prayer was rejected and the appeal was found without merit. On the substantive abatement issue under Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008, the Commissioner (Appeals) view that the two periods formed one continuous period for abatement remained the operative position recorded in the order. en-us Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:09:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190145 The Tribunal allowed rectification of its earlier final order after finding apparent clerical errors in the attribution of parties and the sequence of proceedings, and directed specific textual substitutions in multiple paragraphs. The corrected record reflects that Revenue had sought stay of the Commissioner (Appeals) order, but the stay prayer was rejected and the appeal was found without merit. On the substantive abatement issue under Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008, the Commissioner (Appeals) view that the two periods formed one continuous period for abatement remained the operative position recorded in the order. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190145