TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (9) TMI 159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uirement of the customers to whom they were ultimately to be supplied. 2.We have heard Mr. Hidayatullah at length on the application. The departmental representative contends that the order of the bench is clearer enough and any attempt by the Tribunal to accept the application would amount to review of that order which is impermissible. 3.We are unable, in principle, to accept this contention. The Tribunal has the power to correct an error apparent on the face of the record. The correction of any such error is clearly distinguishable from a review, even if the result of such correction may be different than that already arrived at. 4.We now turn to the merits of the application. In its order the Tribunal has correctly stated that the is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the applicant to the dealer and his supply in turn to the ultimate buyers were shown. These aspects however, were evidently not been considered by the Tribunal. As we have noted it went on the footing that the claim was only based on legal considerations. 6.Even where within the general description of a commodity there exists a significant variation in its size, specification, etc., that each type or model of that commodity could be considered a different commodity. Thus for example, a motor car with certain standard fittings is one kind of commodity. The manufacturer may offer various models of the same motor car having, for example, diesel engine instead of petrol engine, air conditioning provided in addition, etc. It can then not be ....