https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777212 CESTAT allowed the rectification application under section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, holding the alleged errors to be obvious and patent rather than issues requiring extended reasoning. Relying on the Supreme Court's standard for a "mistake apparent on record," the tribunal found the pointed-out typographical/apparent errors visible on the face of the impugned final order and ordered correction. The application was allowed. en-us Fri, 22 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777212 CESTAT allowed the rectification application under section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, holding the alleged errors to be obvious and patent rather than issues requiring extended reasoning. Relying on the Supreme Court's standard for a "mistake apparent on record," the tribunal found the pointed-out typographical/apparent errors visible on the face of the impugned final order and ordered correction. The application was allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 22 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777212