2003 (3) TMI 596 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in Tribunal's Final Order.

Analysis:
The application filed sought rectification of mistakes in the Final Order of the Tribunal, highlighting various facts and documents not mentioned in the order. The appellant's advocate argued that the Tribunal, as the final fact-finding authority, should discuss facts in detail. The mistakes included the absence of sample drawing, seizure, testing of inputs, lack of expert opinions, discrepancies in show cause notices, calculation errors, and incompetence of the Superintendent issuing the notice. Additionally, the Final Order allegedly went beyond the show cause notice, omitted certificates and circular references, and misclassified materials not used by the appellants.

The appellant requested a fresh hearing based on cited decisions, emphasizing the need for rectification. However, the respondent opposed, asserting that the Final Order considered all submissions, and not every detail from the appeal needed mention. The respondent relied on legal precedents to argue against rectification, stating that errors not evident on the face of the record require lengthy reasoning and cannot be cured by writ of certiorari. The respondent also referenced a Supreme Court decision regarding the validity period of show cause notices and settled issues related to specific notifications.

The Tribunal considered both sides' submissions, noting that the calculation mistake was not raised in the Appeal Memorandum, thus not constituting a valid ground for rectification. Referring to relevant case law, the Tribunal emphasized that rectification is limited to errors apparent from the record and does not allow for reappraisal of facts or legal decisions. Citing precedents, the Tribunal rejected the application, stating that seeking a re-hearing of the appeal through rectification was impermissible. The decision highlighted that rectification is not an avenue for challenging validly made decisions based on alleged errors of fact or law, concluding that the application was dismissed.