https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30294 Rectification is confined to errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen issues already decided or to import conditions not found in the notification itself. Exemption under Notification No. 46/94 could not be denied merely because Modvat credit had been taken on inputs, as the notification contained no such condition and the cited Supreme Court ruling was distinguishable. The alleged non-reversal of credit for clandestine removals also disclosed no apparent error, since the record did not establish a rectifiable mistake and the duty paid through PLA exceeded the credit in question. The claim relating to parts of irrigation systems likewise could not be reopened in rectification proceedings. en-us Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30294 Rectification is confined to errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen issues already decided or to import conditions not found in the notification itself. Exemption under Notification No. 46/94 could not be denied merely because Modvat credit had been taken on inputs, as the notification contained no such condition and the cited Supreme Court ruling was distinguishable. The alleged non-reversal of credit for clandestine removals also disclosed no apparent error, since the record did not establish a rectifiable mistake and the duty paid through PLA exceeded the credit in question. The claim relating to parts of irrigation systems likewise could not be reopened in rectification proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30294