https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771416 CESTAT New Delhi dismissed three rectification applications filed by an industrial coating company seeking correction of alleged apparent errors in duty quantification and penalty levy under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The tribunal held that errors apparent on record must be obvious without requiring detailed reasoning or traveling beyond the record, citing SC precedent. The applications were found to be attempts at recalling the order rather than genuine rectification of apparent errors, as the original order adequately addressed all submissions despite lacking detailed findings. en-us Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 May 2025 08:52:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771416 CESTAT New Delhi dismissed three rectification applications filed by an industrial coating company seeking correction of alleged apparent errors in duty quantification and penalty levy under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The tribunal held that errors apparent on record must be obvious without requiring detailed reasoning or traveling beyond the record, citing SC precedent. The applications were found to be attempts at recalling the order rather than genuine rectification of apparent errors, as the original order adequately addressed all submissions despite lacking detailed findings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771416