2020 (3) TMI 640

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Appellant. Shri Pradeep Gupta, Authorised Representative, for the Respondent. ORDER Arguments upon the application praying for rectification of mistake, heard. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant that the findings in para 9 and para 10 of the Final Order No. 50187/2019, dated 5-2-2019 have clearly recorded the observations that trading cannot be called as a service to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ectify mistake does not cover the cases where a revision or review of the order is intended. Reliance has also been placed on another decision cited as Krishan Madan v. Deptt. of Customs reported in 2002 (140) E.L.T. 52 (Del.) to impress upon that the decision on the debatable point of law or disputed question of fact is not an apparent mistake on record. Application is accordingly, prayed to be d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e remanding of the matter for ascertaining the quantum of reversible Cenvat credit is definitely an inadvertent error, which is apparent on the face of record of this order. 4. The case law is relied upon by the Department is held not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present because irrespective, these observations will amount to recalling the order of remand but as it is obs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X