2013 (10) TMI 1242 - AT - Central Excise

Application for Review Held that - Revenue s appeal was dismissed by Hon ble Supreme Court - it is difficult to entertain prayer of Revenue at this stage - Tribunal has no power to review its own order for which Misc. application is dismissed Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Review of stay order based on duty demand pre-deposit.
2. Tribunal's power to review its own order.
3. Delay in hearing appeals.
4. Fixing a date for hearing appeals.

Analysis:
1. The judgment deals with a review application filed by the Revenue seeking to revisit a stay order issued by the Tribunal. The Revenue argued that a pre-deposit of 25% of the duty demand was directed by the Tribunal in subsequent orders, which were upheld by the High Court and the Supreme Court. However, the Tribunal refused to review its stay order dated 21.4.2009, citing the decision in the R.A. Casting case, where it was held that electricity consumption cannot be the basis for alleging clandestine removal. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's review application.

2. The Tribunal also addressed the issue of its power to review its own orders. It stated that since the stay order was based on a specific decision, the Tribunal lacked the authority to review its own order in this context. The Tribunal clarified that a miscellaneous application seeking such a review was not maintainable, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's application.

3. Another issue raised was the delay in the hearing of appeals, with the Revenue expressing concern over the prolonged duration without progress. The Tribunal acknowledged the delay but directed both parties to be prepared for the hearing of specific appeals on a fixed date, thereby attempting to address the issue of delayed proceedings.

4. Finally, the Tribunal disposed of the miscellaneous application with the direction to proceed with the hearing of the mentioned appeals on a specified date. This decision aimed to streamline the proceedings and ensure timely adjudication of the pending appeals, indicating the Tribunal's commitment to efficient case management and resolution of legal matters.

In conclusion, the judgment underscores the importance of adherence to legal principles, the limitations on the Tribunal's review powers, the need for timely resolution of appeals, and the significance of fixing specific dates for hearings to facilitate the expeditious disposal of cases.