2017 (7) TMI 408 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of mistake - case of Revenue is that in the appeal filed by the Revenue, two grounds were raised and this Tribunal has considered only one ground, therefore, there is a mistake apparent on record - Held that - in appeal papers the Revenue has not raised the issue No. 2 before this Tribunal. The said issue raised by the Revenue only in the application for rectification of mistake which is termed as misuse of due process of law. As the issue, whether the respondent is entitle for benefit of exemption N/N. 32/2004 dt. 03.12.2004 was not raised by the Revenue in their appeal, therefore, there is no mistake apparent on record deciding the appeal file by the Revenue before this Tribunal - application of rectification of mistake dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in the order regarding consideration of grounds raised in the appeal by the Revenue.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application for rectification of mistake filed by the Revenue regarding an order issued by the Tribunal. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal had only considered one of the two grounds raised in their appeal. The first ground was related to the entitlement of Cenvat Credit for payment of Service Tax of goods transport agency services, while the second ground was about the entitlement for the benefit of exemption under a specific notification. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal had decided the first issue but had not addressed the second issue. However, upon examination of the appeal papers, it was found that the Revenue had not raised the second issue before the Tribunal during the appeal process. The Tribunal highlighted that the second issue was raised only in the rectification application, which was deemed as a misuse of due process of law. Since the second issue was not part of the original appeal, the Tribunal concluded that there was no mistake apparent on record in the initial decision. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application for rectification of mistake, stating that it held no merits. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the open court by the Tribunal members, Mr. Ashok Jindal and Mr. Devender Singh.

This analysis showcases the procedural aspect of rectification of mistake in a Tribunal order and emphasizes the importance of raising all relevant issues during the appeal process. The judgment underscores the principle that issues not raised in the original appeal cannot be subsequently introduced through rectification applications, thereby upholding the integrity of the legal process and preventing misuse of such procedures.