2014 (2) TMI 918 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - Tribunal in the said order has observed that waste and scrap sold by the appellant has arisen out of capital goods on which no credit was availed by them and as such, there was no requirement of payment of any duty on the said waste and scrap - Held that - Revenue in the present application has introduced a letter dated 14-6-2006 written by the Superintendent (Demand) to Superintendent (Review) wherein the list of all the capital goods/inputs on which the appellant has taken the credit stand enclosed. We note that show cause notice in the present case was issued on 24-4-2002 and the Order-in-Original was passed on 13-1-2004. Thereafter the Order-in-Appeal was also passed on 26-5-2005. As such, it is clear that the said letter dated 14-6-2006, which is now being sought to be relied upon by the Revenue, was never the part of either the show cause notice or the adjudication order or the first appellate authority s order. Further, the said letter was not produced before the Tribunal at the time of disposal of the appeal. As such, the Revenue s endeavour to introduce the said letter in the records of the present case cannot be appreciated. Further, when the said letter was not placed before the Tribunal and accordingly was not considered, it cannot be said that there is any mistake on the part of the Tribunal requesting rectification of final order - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake application regarding Final Order allowing appeal on merits and limitation.

Analysis:
The rectification of mistake application was filed by the Revenue concerning Final Order No. 56180/2013-EX(BR), dated 12-4-2013, where the appellant's appeal was allowed on merits and limitation. The Tribunal had observed that the waste and scrap sold by the appellant derived from capital goods without availing any credit, thus no duty payment was necessary. This conclusion was based on the statement of the appellant's authorized representative and the lack of evidence from the Revenue.

The Revenue presented a letter dated 14-6-2006 in the current application, listing all capital goods/inputs for which the appellant had taken credit. Notably, the show cause notice was issued on 24-4-2002, the Order-in-Original was issued on 13-1-2004, and the Order-in-Appeal was passed on 26-5-2005. The letter in question was not part of any of these proceedings and was not submitted to the Tribunal during the appeal. Therefore, the attempt by the Revenue to introduce this letter into the case records was deemed unacceptable. Since the letter was not before the Tribunal during the appeal process, it was not considered in the decision-making, rendering the Revenue's request for rectification of the final order baseless.

Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application and rejected it. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court, maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.