Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2012 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (2) TMI 485 - AT - Central Excise
Issues involved:
1. Failure to discuss issues related to fine and penalty imposed by the Commissioner in the Tribunal's order. 2. Dismissal of Civil Appeal by the Supreme Court against the Final Order of the Tribunal. 3. Challenge of the Final Order of the Tribunal before the Apex Court. Issue 1: Failure to discuss issues related to fine and penalty: The appellant filed a ROM application, highlighting the absence of discussion on the issues of fine and penalty imposed by the Commissioner in the Tribunal's order. The counsel argued that the final order rejecting the appeal lacked necessary deliberation on these crucial aspects, rendering it erroneous. The appellant also sought to introduce additional grounds through a miscellaneous application, which was rejected by the Bench. Despite referring to para 11 of the ROM application, no apparent mistake or error in the Final Order was identified. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the ROM application due to the absence of substantial grounds for rectification. Issue 2: Dismissal of Civil Appeal by the Supreme Court: It was noted that a Civil Appeal filed by the appellant against the Final Order of the Tribunal was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's order dated 19-7-2010 in Civil Appeal No. 16245/2010 explicitly stated, "Delay condoned. The civil appeal is dismissed." This dismissal by the Apex Court further solidified the Final Order of the Tribunal, indicating that no rectification application could be entertained post the Supreme Court's affirmation. Issue 3: Challenge of the Final Order before the Apex Court: The counsel acknowledged that the Final Order of the Tribunal was challenged in its entirety before the Apex Court. Given the Supreme Court's dismissal of the Civil Appeal, the Final Order of the Tribunal was effectively affirmed by the Apex Court. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that no grounds existed for rectification of the alleged mistake in the Final Order, leading to the dismissal of the ROM application.
|