2018 (6) TMI 1066 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of Mistake Application - as regards the order in respect of Yusuf I Agwan, this Tribunal in para 6 of the order dated 31.10.2017 mentioned that Shri Yusuf I Agwan is a Director of the appellant company. Accordingly, the penalty was imposed. Applicant submits that Shri Yusuf I Agwan is a partner of Act Trading Company and not a Director of M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd. - Held that - There is an apparent mistake occurred in particularly para 6 of order of this Tribunal taking reference of para 7 of the order. Since the appeal of Act Trading Co. was allowed, the same facts applicable to Shri Yusuf I Agvvan as a partner of Act Trading Co. The duty evasion was committed by M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, since the penalty was set aside by allowing the appeal of M/s Act Trading Co., in similar line, the penalty is not imposable on Yusuf I Agwan. ROM application filed by Act Trading Co. - It was wrongly mentioned that M/s Act Trading Co. is manufacturing certain parts and clearing it to M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd in para 7 of the order - Held that - It was observed that M/s Act Trading Co. is not a manufacturing but is a trading concern. Therefore, there is an apparent mistake in para 7 of the order. Accordingly, we rectify the order by amending the second and third line starting from M/s Act Trading Co. is manufacturing certain parts and clearing it to M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd. be corrected and read as M/s Act Trading Co. is trading in parts which is sold to M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd. ROM Application allowed.

Issues: Rectification of mistake regarding the imposition of penalty on Shri Yusuf I Agwan and M/s Act Trading Co.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI, the issue revolved around rectifying a mistake in the imposition of a penalty on Shri Yusuf I Agwan and M/s Act Trading Co. The appellant's counsel argued that Shri Yusuf I Agwan was wrongly considered a Director of M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd. when he is actually a partner of Act Trading Company. The appeal of Act Trading Co. was allowed, indicating a mistake in the initial order. The Revenue contended that the penalty on Shri Yusuf I Agwan was rightly imposed due to his involvement in duty evasion by M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal acknowledged the mistake in the order, where Shri Yusuf I Agwan was incorrectly associated with M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd. as a Director. It was clarified that he is a partner of Act Trading Co., and since the appeal of Act Trading Co. was allowed, the same principle should apply to Shri Yusuf I Agwan. The duty evasion was attributed to M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd., leading to the decision to rectify the order and allow the appeal of Shri Yusuf I Agwan.

Additionally, a Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application was filed by Act Trading Co. to correct the error stating that they were manufacturing certain parts for M/s Agwan Coach Pvt. Ltd., which was inaccurate. The Tribunal noted the mistake and amended the order to reflect that Act Trading Co. is a trading concern, not a manufacturing entity. Consequently, the order was rectified by correcting the relevant lines in the judgment.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rectified the order, allowing the appeals of Shri Yusuf I Agwan and Act Trading Co. The rectification was deemed necessary due to the misinterpretation of roles and activities of the parties involved, ultimately leading to the correction of the penalty imposition and factual inaccuracies in the initial order.

← Previous Next →