2005 (7) TMI 441 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility for drawback claim based on Circular No. 19/2005-Cus.
2. Consideration of Circular in the Tribunal's Final Order.
3. Request for modification of Final Order based on the Circular.

Analysis:

1. The appellants filed a ROM application seeking modification of Final Order No. 409/2005, dated 17-3-2005, after the Commissioner held them ineligible for drawback claim on 22 shipping bills. The appellants referenced Circular No. 19/2005-Cus., dated 21-3-2005, which clarified the rationale behind the fixation of All Industry Rate of drawback. The Circular emphasized that the actual duty incidence by individual exports need not be considered, and field officers cannot question the determination of rates for individual export goods. The appellants argued that this clarification necessitated a reconsideration of their eligibility for drawback. However, the learned Counsel admitted that the Circular was not presented before the Bench during the original order due to its issuance after the order was passed.

2. The learned SDR opposed the appellants' request for modification, asserting that the Tribunal's order was thorough and independent, with all arguments duly considered. The SDR contended that there was no mistake in the original order, and therefore, urged the dismissal of the ROM application. The Tribunal noted that the Circular was not before the Bench during the initial proceedings, as it was issued post the order. The Counsel acknowledged that no crucial argument was overlooked during the appeal hearing, and there was no apparent mistake in the Final Order.

3. After careful consideration, the Tribunal concluded that all arguments were adequately addressed in the original Final Order, and there was no indication of any oversight or mistake in the decision-making process. The absence of the Circular during the initial proceedings did not warrant a modification of the order. The Tribunal rejected the ROM application, emphasizing that there was no merit in revisiting the matter based on the subsequent issuance of the Circular.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the original Final Order No. 409/2005, dated 17-3-2005, denying the appellants' request for modification based on Circular No. 19/2005-Cus., as the Circular was not presented during the initial proceedings and did not demonstrate any error in the Tribunal's decision-making process.