ORDER
P.G. Chacko, Member (J)
1. This application filed by the appellants states that there is some mistake apparent from the record, in our Final Order No. 148/08 dt. 27.2.08. Moving this application, the ld. Counsel has recounted the facts of the case, from which it appears that the original authority confirmed a demand of service tax against the appellants under the category of “Storage & Warehousing Service”, whereas the relevant show-cause notice had demanded service tax from them under a different category viz. “Banking and other Financial Services” (BOFS, for short). In an appeal preferred by the party, the Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the lower authority had travelled beyond the scope of the SCN and, accordingly, set aside its order and remanded the case. In further appeal filed with the Tribunal, the decision of the lower appellate authority to remand the case to the original authority was approved vide Final Order No. 148/08 dt. 27.2.08. Nevertheless, the appellants have come up with the present application for rectification of mistake in the final order. In support of this application, the ld. Counsel relies on the decision of this Bench in Carborandum Universal Ltd. v. Commissioner 2007 (211) ELT 105 (Tri.-Chennai), wherein an order of the Commissioner classifying a product under a heading different from what had been proposed in the SCN was set aside and the appeals filed by the assessee were allowed. The civil appeal filed by the department against the said decision of this Bench was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide Commissioner v. Carborandum Universal Ltd. 2008 (223) ELT A94 (SC) cited by the ld. Counsel. What emerges from the cited case law is that an adjudicating authority cannot be permitted to travel beyond the scope of the SCN. Our Final Order No. 148/08 ibid sustaining the decision of the lower appellate authority to remand the case to the original authority for fresh decision within the scope of the SCN is perfectly in keeping with this tenet of law. We have found no mistake whatsoever in the final order.
2. The application gets dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)