Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2010 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2010 (7) TMI 848 - AT - Customs

Issues:
Correction of typographical error in the Final Order.

Analysis:
The judgment involves a miscellaneous application seeking correction of a typographical error in the Final Order of the Tribunal. The error pertains to the date '7-11-2007' mentioned in the order, which should have been '7-11-2006' as conceded by the learned JDR representing the Revenue. The Final Order in question relates to a refund claim sanctioned by the Assistant Commissioner, which was later directed to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. The appellants contended that the subsequent Order-in-Original dated 21-2-07 was not valid since the claim was already sanctioned on 7-11-06 and not appealed against by the Revenue. The Member (T) found merit in the appellant's submission that the Assistant Commissioner became functus officio after passing the initial order on 7-11-06, thus setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal.

The Member (T) carefully considered the records and submissions, noting the typographical error pointed out in the miscellaneous application. Although the appellants did not file a Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application as required under the Customs Act, 1962, a precedent from the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. was cited where a similar typographical error was corrected by the Tribunal despite a delay in filing the ROM application. The Tribunal's decision in the cited case emphasized correcting the error and confirming the accurate amount to be set aside, disregarding technicalities. Drawing parallels with the cited case, the Member (T) allowed the miscellaneous application in the present case, rectifying the date in the Final Order from '7-11-2007' to '7-11-2006'.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses the correction of a typographical error in the Final Order, highlighting the importance of rectifying such errors even in the absence of a formal ROM application. The decision to allow the correction aligns with established precedents emphasizing the accuracy of legal documents and orders.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates