https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393315 The court found that the CESTAT's failure to consider the appellant's plea regarding the extended period of limitation constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. The court set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the CESTAT for fresh consideration of the rectification of mistake application. Both substantial questions of law were answered in favor of the appellant, leading to the appeal being allowed and disposed of accordingly. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393315 The court found that the CESTAT's failure to consider the appellant's plea regarding the extended period of limitation constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. The court set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the CESTAT for fresh consideration of the rectification of mistake application. Both substantial questions of law were answered in favor of the appellant, leading to the appeal being allowed and disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393315