2018 (7) TMI 2265 - AT - Customs

Application for Rectification of Mistake - error apparent on the face of record or not - HELD THAT - The error pointed out by the Ld. A.R is an error which is apparent on the face of record and requires rectification. It is thus ordered that the Final Order in M/S INNOBIZ ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, TUTICORIN 2017 (1) TMI 1305 - CESTAT CHENNAI is to be modified. The last sentence in page 2 of the said final order will read as under The appeal of M/s.Innobiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd. is taken up for disposal in this order. The ROM application is allowed.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of error in Final Order

In this case, the main issue revolves around rectifying an error in the Final Order No.42254/2016 dated 19.07.2016, where the Tribunal noted appeals filed by both M/s.Innobiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Bhavesh Shah Kishore. However, it was revealed that the Managing Director, Shri Bhavesh Shah Kishore, did not file any appeal against the penalty imposed on him under Section 112(a) and Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Department sought rectification of this error as it was apparent on the face of the record.

Analysis:

The Department, through the Learned Additional Representative (A.R) Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, pointed out the discrepancy in the Final Order where it incorrectly mentioned Shri Bhavesh Shah Kishore as a party filing an appeal. However, it was clarified by the counsels for the respondent, Shri Hari Radhakrishnan and Shri G. Derrick Sam, that the appeal was solely filed by M/s.Innobiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and not by the Managing Director. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, acknowledged the error as apparent on the face of the record. The Bench, consisting of Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) and Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical), ordered the modification of the Final Order to rectify the mistake. The correction specified that the appeal of M/s.Innobiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd. would be the sole focus of the Final Order, thereby clarifying the parties involved in the appeal process.

This judgment highlights the importance of accuracy in legal documentation and the necessity of rectifying errors that are evident on the record. The Tribunal's decision to rectify the Final Order demonstrates the commitment to ensuring clarity and precision in legal proceedings. By addressing the discrepancy and making the necessary correction, the Tribunal upholds the integrity and accuracy of the judicial process, ultimately serving the interests of justice and fairness.