2007 (9) TMI 91 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of Mistake Final order of Tribunal is based on decision of SC in the case of Sahkari Khand Udyog Ltd. , so it cannot be said to be based on irrelevant material Assessee contention to decide the matter on basis of other decision of SC, is not permissible under the law

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in Final Order Nos. 423-424, 2007-SM(BR) dated 19-1-2007 by Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Unjust Enrichment in Provisional Assessment Cases:
The central issue in this case revolved around the applicability of the principle of unjust enrichment on the finalization of provisional assessment made under rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Respondent sought rectification of mistake in Final Order Nos. 423-424, 2007-SM(BR) dated 19-1-2007, contending that the doctrine of unjust enrichment did not apply to provisional assessment cases prior to 25-6-1999. The Respondent relied on decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to support their position, while the Departmental Representative cited a different Supreme Court decision in opposition.

2. Rectification Application and Case Laws Submission:
The Respondent highlighted that the decision in the case of Mafatlal Industries Limited by a Nine Judges Bench of the Supreme Court should prevail over a subsequent three Judges Bench decision in the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Limited. They submitted case law to support their argument, including the decision in the case of Poolpandi v. Superintendent, Central Excise. The Respondent also referenced decisions by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay and Tribunal rulings in similar cases to strengthen their position.

3. Scope of Rectification and Tribunal's Decision:
The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both sides, emphasizing that the Final Order dated 19-1-2007 followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Limited. The Tribunal rejected the rectification applications, stating that the Final Order was based on relevant material and the contention to decide based on other Supreme Court decisions amounted to a review, which is impermissible. The Tribunal cited a larger bench decision to support the principle that decisions contrary to the Supreme Court's pronouncement should be rectified, but in this case, the Tribunal's decision aligned with the Supreme Court's ruling.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld its Final Order, rejecting the rectification applications and emphasizing the application of the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Limited. The detailed analysis of various legal precedents and arguments presented by both parties provided a comprehensive understanding of the issues involved in the judgment.