TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were not considered. The so-called errors pointed out and contentions raised by the appellants counsel are not obvious and are such that they cannot be discovered without detailed argument of the entire appeal. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has laid the proposition that an error which has to be established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points where there may conceivably be two opinions can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record. - applications before me are an ROA application and a Misc. application to convert the ROA into an ROM by causing amendments in the ROA. The learned Counsel for appellant has not put forward any explanation as to why he has filed an ROA - While an application for resto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are for rectification of mistake on the ground of error apparent on the face of record of the Tribunal Final Order No. A/54472/2014-SM/BR/dated 13.10.2014. The prayer sought in the ROA is to recall the Final Order, rehear on merits and pass appropriate order correcting the apparent error on the face of record. Thus per se the application is ROM. But the same is seen filed as ROA. When the ROA application came up for hearing on 18.6.2015 these defects were pointed out. The learned Counsel for appellant sought adjournment of the matter. The case was adjourned to 27.7.2015 when further adjournment was sought. Today when the ROA came up for hearing, another application as Misc. No. 51552/2015 is filed by the appellant seeking amendment of the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The issue in the appeal is regarding availment of Cenvat Credit. The appellants, M/s Indian Visit (P.) Ltd., were providing tour services for both foreign and local tourists. The payments from foreign tourists were received in convertible foreign exchange. According to appellants these being treated as export of services are not taxable services whereas, services provided to local tourists were taxable. Appellant availed Cenvat Credit on common input services viz., Banking, Chartered Accounts Services, Telephone etc. According to them they were maintaining separate accounts and was eligible for credit. The Order-in-Original observed that appellants should not have utilized Cenvat Credit on those input services which were used for providin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out process of reasoning on points where there may conceivably be two opinions. Such error should not require any extraneous matter to show its incorrectness. To put it differently, it should be so manifest and clear that no Court would permit it to remain on record, if the view accepted by the Court in the original judgment is one of the possible views, the case cannot be said to be covered by an error apparent on the face of the record. 9. Thus an error cannot be said to be apparent if it is not self evident. In the present case there is no error manifest and the Tribunal by its Final Order has passed a detailed order on merits. The Counsel for appellant contends that the issues raised were not considered. The so-called errors pointed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
