2018 (4) TMI 970 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of Mistake - Tribunal in final order dated 18/08/2017 in paragraph No. has recorded that the first appellate authority has recorded in paragraph No. 8 that appellant had not filed any reply to the notice but also did not appear to lead defence in spite of several opportunities granted - Held that - There seems to be error an apparent on the face of the record in final order No. A/89451/17/ SMB dated 18/08/2017 - The application filed by the Revenue for recall of the order needs to be allowed and the final order dated 18/08/2017 recalled and direct the Registry to list the appeal to its original number and list the same for final disposal - Application for rectification of mistake is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in final order dated 18/08/2017

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application filed by the Revenue for rectification of mistake in a final order dated 18/08/2017. The Tribunal noted that the first appellate authority had initially recorded that the appellant had not filed any reply to the notice and had not appeared to lead a defense despite opportunities granted. However, the Revenue contended that in the order dated 31/10/2016, the first appellate authority specifically recorded that the appellant had appeared and argued the matter in detail. Upon perusal of the records, the Tribunal found an apparent error in the final order dated 18/08/2017. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the application for recall of the order, recalling the final order and directing the Registry to list the appeal for final disposal under its original number. The application for rectification of mistake was thus allowed, leading to the modification of the previous final order.

This judgment highlights the importance of maintaining accurate records and rectifying mistakes promptly. It underscores the significance of ensuring that the factual findings and observations in the orders are consistent and free from errors. The Tribunal's decision to recall the final order based on the discrepancy in the recording of the appellant's appearance and arguments underscores the commitment to upholding procedural fairness and rectifying errors that may impact the outcome of the case. The judgment serves as a reminder of the need for precision and accuracy in judicial proceedings to uphold the integrity and effectiveness of the adjudicatory process.