2019 (5) TMI 68 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of Mistake - typographical error - HELD THAT - There is typographical error in Para 2 of the Final Order of the Tribunal - the same is rectified. Rectification of mistake - error which is sought to be rectified by the appellant is that the details of man hours spent for each activity along with the cost of such manpower will not be available in some cases - HELD THAT - There is no error apparent on the face of the records but at the same time the said sentence needs clarification, which is done. Application for ROM disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistakes in the Final Order of the Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. Issue 1 - Typographical Error in Classification Contestation: The Tribunal acknowledged a typographical error in the Final Order related to the classification contestation by the Appellant. The error was in a sentence stating the Appellant's position on the classification and tax liability. After reviewing the records, the Tribunal agreed with the Appellant's counsel that the sentence needed rectification. The corrected sentence clarified that the Appellant contested the classification and asserted that the OT is a transport terminal not liable for tax.

2. Issue 2 - Rectification Request Regarding Man Hours and Cost Details: The Appellant sought rectification in Para 13 of the Final Order concerning the availability of details of man hours spent for each activity along with the cost of manpower in certain cases. The Tribunal found that while there was no apparent error in the records, the sentence required clarification. The corrected sentence emphasized that in a pure service contract based on a cost-plus model, the essential character of the service rendered could be determined from the details of man hours and cost of manpower or any other method of determining activity costs. This clarification was deemed necessary to address potential discrepancies in the availability of such details in some cases.

3. Conclusion: The Tribunal disposed of the applications for rectification of mistakes by issuing corrected statements for the relevant paragraphs in the Final Order. The corrections aimed to accurately reflect the Appellant's contestation of classification and to provide clarity on determining the essential character of services rendered under composite contracts based on cost-plus models. The judgment highlighted the importance of precision and clarity in legal documents to ensure the accurate representation of parties' positions and legal interpretations.