https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460521 Non-consideration of an alternate exemption ground specifically raised in appeal under Notification No. 151/2009-Cus. constituted an error apparent on the face of the record, so rectification under section 129B(2) read with rule 41 was permissible to the limited extent of inserting discussion on that omitted plea. The entitlement to exemption itself, however, depended on factual and legal conditions in the notification, including supporting certificate requirements, and was treated as a debatable merits issue. Rectification could not be used to reopen or finally decide that substantive claim once the Tribunal had become functus officio on the merits. en-us Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Jan 2025 13:30:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460521 Non-consideration of an alternate exemption ground specifically raised in appeal under Notification No. 151/2009-Cus. constituted an error apparent on the face of the record, so rectification under section 129B(2) read with rule 41 was permissible to the limited extent of inserting discussion on that omitted plea. The entitlement to exemption itself, however, depended on factual and legal conditions in the notification, including supporting certificate requirements, and was treated as a debatable merits issue. Rectification could not be used to reopen or finally decide that substantive claim once the Tribunal had become functus officio on the merits. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460521