2005 (7) TMI 456 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Recall of order based on case law not discussed by the Bench.
2. Scope of Review of Order (ROM) application.
3. Power of Tribunal to recall its own order for re-appreciation of evidence and law.
4. Dismissal of ROM application due to lack of patent mistake of fact or law.

Analysis:
1. The appellants sought a recall of the order, claiming that the case law cited during the appeal hearing was not discussed by the Bench. The Tribunal clarified that the scope of the ROM is limited to correcting mistakes of fact or law apparent on the record. Debated facts or laws requiring interpretation cannot be the basis for a recall. The Tribunal referenced a case where it was stated that inherent powers under Rule 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules should be used for rectification. However, the Tribunal noted that this case law did not advance the appellants' case.

2. The Tribunal emphasized that in an ROM application, there is no power to recall an order for re-appreciation of evidence and law if no apparent mistake exists. The Tribunal cannot rectify or recall an order simply because the assessee desires re-evaluation of facts and law. In the present case, all contentions raised by the appellants' counsel were considered and discussed in the impugned order. The case law cited was also referred to and distinguished.

3. The Tribunal concluded that since the order did not contain any patent mistake of fact or law, the appellants' ROM application lacked merit and was dismissed. The Tribunal highlighted that the ROM application could not be entertained if the order was free from any apparent error. Therefore, the dismissal was based on the absence of a clear mistake in the original order.

4. In the final pronouncement, the Tribunal dictated and pronounced the decision in the open court, affirming the dismissal of the ROM application due to the absence of any patent mistake of fact or law in the original order. The judgment reiterated the limited scope of the Tribunal's power to recall orders and emphasized the importance of clear errors for such applications to be considered.