2019 (6) TMI 631 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of Mistake - Error apparent on the face of record - HELD THAT - The word 'justified' used in para 7 is an error apparent on the face of record. The word used ought to have been 'not justified'. The impugned final order is therefore modified to the extent of correcting the said sentence - ROM Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Correction of error in the final order regarding the rejection of refund claims.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai, the appellant filed ROM applications seeking a correction in the final order. The appellant's counsel argued that the Tribunal erroneously stated the rejection of refund claims as 'justified' in para 7 of the impugned final order. The counsel referred to previous decisions of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court to support the argument that refund claims cannot be rejected on the ground of being time-barred. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, acknowledged the error in the final order and concluded that the word 'justified' should have been 'not justified.' Consequently, the Tribunal modified the final order to correct the sentence to state that the rejection of refund claims is not justified. The ROM applications were allowed, and the correction was made in the open court.

This judgment highlights the importance of precise language in legal orders and the need for accurate expression to reflect the Tribunal's decision correctly. It also demonstrates the Tribunal's commitment to rectifying errors that are apparent on the face of the record to ensure the accuracy and integrity of its judgments. The reference to previous decisions of the High Court adds weight to the argument presented by the appellant's counsel and shows the reliance on legal precedents to support legal interpretations and conclusions. Overall, the judgment emphasizes the Tribunal's role in ensuring the correctness of its orders and the adherence to legal principles in deciding cases involving refund claims.