<?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>2018 (5) TMI 94 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359530</link>
    <description>Rectification of mistake under section 35C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is confined to a mistake apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to raise a new issue or secure a finding on a point not taken in the grounds of appeal or argued at the hearing. The application sought inclusion of an option to pay penalty at 25% of the confirmed demand, but that relief had not been raised earlier. The rectification application was therefore not maintainable and was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2018 10:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518686" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 94 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359530</link>
      <description>Rectification of mistake under section 35C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is confined to a mistake apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to raise a new issue or secure a finding on a point not taken in the grounds of appeal or argued at the hearing. The application sought inclusion of an option to pay penalty at 25% of the confirmed demand, but that relief had not been raised earlier. The rectification application was therefore not maintainable and was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>