9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 1203 - AT - Central ExciseRectification of mistake - Held that - In para 3 of the impugned order, for 70% and 30% , 30% and 70% respectively will be substituted. - counsel in his application has also stated certain other points. One of the points mentioned is that the fact found by the original authority was not challenged. This point was not part of appeal memorandum and in any case challenge to original order will included the same. We find other points are not in the nature which can be considered in the ROM application. ROM is not a forum to review the order or rewrite the full order. - Appeal disposed of.
Issues:
Rectification of mistake in the order issued by the Tribunal. Analysis: The judgment pertains to an application for rectification of mistake in an order issued by the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the substitution of '70%' and '30%' with '30%' and '70%' respectively in para 3 of the order. Additionally, the Tribunal added a new paragraph after para 6, highlighting the appellant's contestation of the invocation of the extended period. The appellant cited various case laws, including the Tribunal's decision in a specific case, to support their argument. The Tribunal noted that the invocation of the extended period of limitation is a mixed question of facts and law, dependent on the specifics of each case. In this case, the appellant was clearing goods both with and without duty payment under specific notifications, which had conditions regarding cenvat credit on inputs. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s findings that the extended period of limitation was correctly invoked based on the facts and circumstances presented. The learned counsel also raised additional points in the application, one of which was the fact found by the original authority not being challenged. The Tribunal noted that this point was not part of the appeal memorandum and should have been included in the original challenge. The Tribunal emphasized that a rectification of mistake application is not a platform to review or rewrite the entire order. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the other points raised by the counsel. The miscellaneous application for rectification of mistake was disposed of accordingly.
|
