2018 (7) TMI 329 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of mistake - case of appellant is that their appeal was in respect of refund claim of service tax under different Heads viz. Goods Transport Agency Technical Testing and Inspection Service Business Auxiliary Service and Courier Service whereas in the Tribunal s case M/s LGW Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Kolkata-I 2017 (9) TMI 1674 - CESTAT KOLKATA it has been mentioned that the rejection of refund claim of service tax paid on only Technical Testing Service . Held that - Since the mistake is apparent on the face of record the same is hereby rectified and in the case M/s LGW Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Kolkata-I 2017 (9) TMI 1674 - CESTAT KOLKATA it may be read as The appellant is engaged in the business of exporting of raw cotton and other cotton related goods. The appellant filed this appeal against rejection of refund claim on Service Tax paid erroneously on Goods Transport Agency Technical Testing and Inspection Service Business Auxiliary Service and Courier Service . ROM Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistake in Tribunal's Final Order regarding refund claim of service tax under different heads.

The judgment involves an application seeking rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's Final Order regarding a refund claim of service tax under various heads. The appellant/applicant argued that their appeal covered refund claims under different heads such as Goods Transport Agency, Technical Testing and Inspection Service, Business Auxiliary Service, and Courier Service. However, the Tribunal's Final Order incorrectly mentioned the rejection of the refund claim only for "Technical Testing Service." The Judicial Member, after hearing both sides, acknowledged the mistake in the order and rectified it. The order was amended to reflect that the appellant was engaged in exporting raw cotton and other related goods, and the appeal was against the rejection of refund claims on "Goods Transport Agency," "Technical Testing and Inspection Service," "Business Auxiliary Service," and "Courier Service." The rectification of mistake application was allowed, and the order was corrected accordingly.

This judgment highlights the importance of accurately reflecting the grounds of appeal and the specific services involved in refund claims to ensure a fair and just decision. It underscores the significance of rectifying mistakes that are apparent on the face of the record to uphold the principles of natural justice and provide a correct interpretation of the appellant's claims. The Tribunal's willingness to rectify the error demonstrates a commitment to ensuring that the appellant's arguments are accurately represented and considered in the final decision-making process. It serves as a reminder for tribunals to carefully review and rectify any inaccuracies in their orders to maintain transparency and uphold the integrity of the judicial process.