2018 (10) TMI 820

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pplication filed under Section 35C(2) from the applicants sides only, as OP is absent despite notice. 2. The contention of the applicant, who is the appellant in the appeal no. E/85668/2016, is that the order was passed by my predecessor Dr. D.N. Panda, Judicial Member on 06.10.2017 discussing about the merit of order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) which was observed by the Tribunal as not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uch decision or order with such direction as Appellate Tribunal may think fit for a fresh adjudication or decision. Therefore such order in remanding the matter back to the adjudicating authority appears to be typographical error and in exercise of power vested under Section 35C(2), such mistake can be rectified by this Appellate Tribunal itself and the CESTAT Procedure Rules empowers the successo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... judicating authority" found in para 6 of the order passed on 06.10.2017 is deemed to be meant as "Commissioner (Appeals)" and a formal amendment is permissible under Section 35C(2), under which the ROM application is filed. The ROM is accordingly allowed. Hence the order. 7. The corrected order in para 6 be read as follows - "In result, both the appeals are remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X