2018 (4) TMI 64 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - the case law cited by the assessee-Appellants is either not considered or misinterpreted - Held that - it may be mentioned that ROM amounts to review of the impugned order which is not permissible - Further, it is not necessary to discuss all the arguments and materials produced during the course of hearing. Only cumulative effect will have to be mentioned - ROM application dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Alleged factual mistake in the Final Order, consideration of case law, permissibility of Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application, review of impugned order, relevance of cited case laws, necessity of discussing all arguments and materials produced.

In this case, a Rectification of Mistake (ROM) Application was filed alleging a factual mistake in the Final Order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted the absence of representation for the assessee-Applicants and proceeded to hear the Department's representative. The main contention in the ROM application was that the case law cited by the assessee-Appellants was either not considered or misinterpreted. The Tribunal highlighted that ROM amounts to a review of the impugned order, which is impermissible in law, citing precedents such as Prajatantra Prachar Samity Vs CIT, CIT Vs McDowell & Co Ltd, M/s Bhagat Construction Store Vs CIT, and CIT Vs Malwa Texturising (P) Ltd. Additionally, the Tribunal emphasized the need to mention only the cumulative effect of arguments and materials produced during the hearing, following the precedent set in the case of CIT Vs Karam C. Thapar. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the ROM Application and dismissed it.