9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 141 - AT - Service TaxRectification of mistake - Business Auxiliary Service - Ocean Freight Services - Held that - demand is confirmed under the head Business Support Service and therefore the order requires correction - date of hearing it is noted as 24.7.2012. He submits that the case was heard on 26.7.2012. We have checked the cause list as also proceedings recorded in the file which show that stay petition was heard on 26.7.2012 and decided on that date. Accordingly, the date of hearing is corrected as 26.7.2012 instead of 24.7.2012 as recorded in the stay order. Further, since the order was dictated and pronounced on 26.7.2012, the stay order number itself is revised as 656-657/12 dt. 26.7.12 - Rectification done.
Issues:
Rectification of mistake in Stay Order regarding the category of service tax and the date of hearing. Analysis: The judgment involves applications for rectification of mistakes in Stay Order No.656-657/12 dated 24.7.12 passed in Stay Application Nos.ST/S/277, 278/12 in Appeal Nos.ST/362, 363/12. The main correction sought is related to the category under which the demand of service tax was confirmed. The applicant contends that the demand was made under 'Business Support Service' and not 'Business Auxiliary Service' as erroneously mentioned in the order. The records confirm that the demand is indeed under 'Business Support Service,' requiring a correction in the order to reflect the accurate category. Another mistake highlighted during the hearing pertains to the date of the hearing noted in the order as 24.7.2012, whereas the case was actually heard on 26.7.2012 as evidenced by the cause list and proceedings recorded in the file. Consequently, the date of the hearing is corrected to 26.7.2012, and the stay order number is revised to 656-657/12 dated 26.7.12 to align with the actual date on which the order was dictated and pronounced. The Rectification of Mistake (ROM) is allowed by incorporating these three corrections in the previously issued stay order. In conclusion, the judgment addresses the rectification of mistakes in the Stay Order pertaining to the category of service tax demand and the date of the hearing. The corrections ensure that the order accurately reflects the demand under 'Business Support Service' and the correct date of the hearing, thereby rectifying the inaccuracies in the initial order.
|
