9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 27 - AT - CustomsRectification of Mistake - error apparent on the face of record or not - HELD THAT - Tribunal in para 6 as well as in para 12 has noted that the appeal filed by Fortune Marketing Ltd. before the Apex Court was dismissed as withdrawn on 13.1.2017. On perusal of the order produced by the ld. counsel, we are convinced that this is an error apparent on the face of record. We therefore hold that the same is to be rectified. ROM application allowed.
Issues Involved:
Rectification of errors in the final order passed by the Tribunal regarding the appeal filed by a company before the Apex Court. Analysis: The judgment deals with a Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application filed by the respondent seeking rectification of errors in the final order passed by the Tribunal. The respondent contended that there was an error in the final order where the Tribunal referred to the appeal filed by a specific company before the Apex Court as dismissed as withdrawn on a particular date. The respondent argued that the appeal was actually dismissed by the Apex Court and not withdrawn. It was clarified that the appeal filed by another company had been dismissed as withdrawn. The respondent requested rectification of this error, which was deemed apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and examined the impugned order. It was noted that in para 6 and para 12 of the order, there was a reference to the appeal filed by the company before the Apex Court being dismissed as withdrawn. Upon perusal of the order presented by the respondent's counsel, the Tribunal acknowledged the error in the order and agreed that it needed rectification. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to rectify the impugned order by deleting the words "as withdrawn" in para 6 and 12. Additionally, the last sentence in para 6 was also deleted to correct the mistake. The ROM application was allowed in the specified terms, and the rectification was made accordingly. In conclusion, the judgment focused on rectifying a factual error in the final order passed by the Tribunal regarding the status of an appeal filed by a company before the Apex Court. The rectification was deemed necessary as the error was apparent on the face of the record, and the Tribunal modified the impugned order by deleting the inaccurate terms and sentences to ensure the correctness of the order.
|
