<?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 926 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360362</link>
    <description>A rectification application was allowed where the record showed that the final order contained a clerical mistake in the amounts recorded for demurrage charges and HSSC. The correct figures were taken from the materials on record, and the earlier recital was directed to be read in corrected form as a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The correction was limited to the typographical error and did not alter the substantive decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2018 06:43:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520383" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 926 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360362</link>
      <description>A rectification application was allowed where the record showed that the final order contained a clerical mistake in the amounts recorded for demurrage charges and HSSC. The correct figures were taken from the materials on record, and the earlier recital was directed to be read in corrected form as a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The correction was limited to the typographical error and did not alter the substantive decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>