https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376919 Rectification proceedings are limited to correcting mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen a concluded merits determination. Here, the recorded statement that no appeal had been filed was shown to be factually incorrect because an appeal had in fact been filed and later disposed of for non-compliance with pre-deposit; that apparent error was corrected. However, the challenge to penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 would have required reconsideration of the earlier liability finding, which amounted to review. The request to revisit the penalty issue was therefore declined. en-us Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Mar 2019 00:02:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376919 Rectification proceedings are limited to correcting mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen a concluded merits determination. Here, the recorded statement that no appeal had been filed was shown to be factually incorrect because an appeal had in fact been filed and later disposed of for non-compliance with pre-deposit; that apparent error was corrected. However, the challenge to penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 would have required reconsideration of the earlier liability finding, which amounted to review. The request to revisit the penalty issue was therefore declined. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376919