2016 (10) TMI 236

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Advocates, for the Petitioner. Shri Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil and Dinesh M., SCs, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by Exhibit P7 order against which the petitioner has moved a rectification application under Exhibit P8 and P9. The specific contention taken up by the petitioner, a works contractor is that the petitioner had only executed one construction work in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has been stated that there was a mistake in so far as the award amount being communicated and the details of such work awarded has also been produced by them. It has been categorically stated that the amount of Rs. 57,25,526/- indicated in the communication to the Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax, was a typographic error and the actual amount is only Rs. 5,72,526/-. Considering the fact that th....