Per Gowri Shankar :

The application contends there are two errors in the order of the bench. The first is that the Tribunal has not considered the material evidence produced to show the difference between the standard type of electric motors manufactured by the applicant and the other motors generally described as non-standard which were manufactured according to the specific requirement of the customers to whom they were ultimately to be supplied.

2. We have heard Mr. Hidayatullah at length on the application. The departmental representative contends that the order of the bench is clearer enough and any attempt by the Tribunal to accept the application would amount to review of that order which is impermissible.

3. We are unable, in principle, to accept this contention. The Tribunal has the power to correct an error apparent on the face of the record. The correction of any such error is clearly distinguishable from a review, even if the result of such correction may be different than that already arrived at.

4. We now turn to the merits of the application. In its order the Tribunal has correctly stated that the issue for consideration is whether the same dealers who were purchasi