https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379437 The court corrected a typographical error in a refund claim amount mentioned in its order. The original amount denied by the Revenue was &8377; 6,76,301, but the court mistakenly stated it as &8377; 6,26,301. The court acknowledged the error and directed the modification of the paragraph to reflect the correct refund amount. The case involved a dispute related to the rejection of a refund claim based on the description of plastic granules in invoices. The court found the error to be typographical and easily rectifiable, ultimately disposing of the application in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 18 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 May 2019 17:52:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379437 The court corrected a typographical error in a refund claim amount mentioned in its order. The original amount denied by the Revenue was &8377; 6,76,301, but the court mistakenly stated it as &8377; 6,26,301. The court acknowledged the error and directed the modification of the paragraph to reflect the correct refund amount. The case involved a dispute related to the rejection of a refund claim based on the description of plastic granules in invoices. The court found the error to be typographical and easily rectifiable, ultimately disposing of the application in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 18 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379437