<?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 (9) TMI 737 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367001</link>
    <description>A tribunal may use its rectification power only to correct a mistake apparent from the record, not to exercise review jurisdiction in the strict sense, and mere drafting or pronouncement irregularities are not enough on their own to justify recall. However, where the hearing process is shown to have denied a party a fair opportunity to present its case, or where adverse remarks are made against counsel without giving an opportunity to respond, the resulting breach of natural justice can constitute an apparent error warranting recall. On that basis, the miscellaneous application succeeded, the earlier order was recalled, and the appeal was restored for further proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2019 13:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 737 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367001</link>
      <description>A tribunal may use its rectification power only to correct a mistake apparent from the record, not to exercise review jurisdiction in the strict sense, and mere drafting or pronouncement irregularities are not enough on their own to justify recall. However, where the hearing process is shown to have denied a party a fair opportunity to present its case, or where adverse remarks are made against counsel without giving an opportunity to respond, the resulting breach of natural justice can constitute an apparent error warranting recall. On that basis, the miscellaneous application succeeded, the earlier order was recalled, and the appeal was restored for further proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>