2014 (3) TMI 867 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - Limitation - Held that - order of the Hon ble High Court does not grant liberty to the department to move such application under Section 35(c)(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 even beyond a period of six months. Liberty to take appropriate remedy would not imply that the Hon ble High Court had condoned the delay in filing such application in the absence of any specific direction by the High Court in that regard. Mere grant of liberty to take appropriate remedy does not amount to extend the period of limitation to file the application for rectification of mistake - the application having been filed beyond the period of limitation is liable to be dismissed - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Condonation of delay in filing application for rectification of mistake in Tribunal's order due to the failure to consider a conditional assessment order, application filed beyond the prescribed time limit, applicability of principles of natural justice in recalling orders, interpretation of "with liberty to adopt remedy" granted by the High Court.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in this judgment revolves around the condonation of delay in filing an application for rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's order. The department sought condonation of delay due to the Tribunal's failure to consider that the assessment order was conditional and the respondent did not comply with the condition. The department approached the High Court, which allowed the appeal to be withdrawn, leading to the application for rectification. The department relied on the principle that the Tribunal has inherent power to recall its order if sufficient cause is shown, emphasizing the need to do justice between the parties based on the principles of natural justice.

2. The second issue concerns the timeliness of the application for rectification. The counsel argued that the application was filed beyond the prescribed period of six months under Section 35C(ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Citing relevant case laws, the counsel contended that there is no provision for condonation of delay beyond the statutory time limit. The Tribunal's decisions in similar cases highlighted the importance of adhering to the statutory time limit for filing applications, dismissing applications filed after the prescribed period.

3. Another crucial aspect of the judgment involves the interpretation of the High Court's order granting "liberty to adopt remedy before the Tribunal." The Tribunal analyzed a similar case and concluded that such liberty does not extend the period of limitation for filing an application for rectification of mistake. The Tribunal emphasized that the High Court's grant of liberty does not imply condonation of delay in filing the application, and the absence of specific direction does not extend the statutory time limit.

4. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the application for rectification of mistake filed beyond the period of limitation. The Tribunal aligned with the counsel's arguments and previous decisions, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory time limits and distinguishing the exceptional nature of certain judgments cited by the department. The application was deemed time-barred and consequently dismissed.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment delves into the core issues of condonation of delay, statutory time limits, principles of natural justice, and the interpretation of High Court orders, providing a detailed overview of the legal reasoning and conclusions reached by the Tribunal.