2018 (4) TMI 970 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Rectification of Mistake – Tribunal in final order dated 18/08/2017 in paragraph No. has recorded that the first appellate authority has recorded in paragraph No. 8 that appellant had not filed any reply to the notice but also did not appear to lead defence in spite of several opportunities granted – Held that: – There seems to be error an apparent on the face of the record in final order No. A/89451/17/ SMB dated 18/08/2017 – The application filed by the Revenue for recall of the order, needs to be allowed and the final order dated 18/08/2017 recalled and direct the Registry to list the appeal to its original number and list the same for final disposal – Application for rectification of mistake is
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
es granted. On recording such finding that Tribunal remitted the matter back to the first appellate authority. 4. It is the case of the Revenue in the application for rectification of mistake that the first appellate authority in the order dated 3 1/10/2016 in paragraph No.8 specifically recorded that appellant has appeared and argued the matter in detail. 5. On perusal of the order dated 31/10/2017 in appeal No. ST/85217/2017, I do find it so. There seems to be error an apparent on the face of the record in final order No. A/89451/17/ SMB dated 18/08/2017. The application filed by the Revenue for recall of the order, in my view, needs to be allowed and I recall the final order dated 18/08/2017 and direct the Registry to list the appeal to
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =