https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50657 Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is limited to a manifest error apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen issues already considered on merits. On the limitation point relating to Modvat credit taken within six months from 18-7-1996, the prior order had already considered Notification No. 28/95-CE (NT), the Larger Bench ruling in Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd., and the Board circular; no apparent mistake was shown, so no correction was warranted. The remand concerning admissibility of Modvat credit was also found free from apparent error, as the challenge that the inputs were different from those in the pending reference was not established. en-us Fri, 07 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:48:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50657 Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is limited to a manifest error apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen issues already considered on merits. On the limitation point relating to Modvat credit taken within six months from 18-7-1996, the prior order had already considered Notification No. 28/95-CE (NT), the Larger Bench ruling in Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd., and the Board circular; no apparent mistake was shown, so no correction was warranted. The remand concerning admissibility of Modvat credit was also found free from apparent error, as the challenge that the inputs were different from those in the pending reference was not established. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50657