2018 (7) TMI 406 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - the Revenue in the grounds of appeal had prayed for remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) - Held that - Paragraph number 5 of the Final Order dated 03.08.2017 is hereby rectified/modified as The appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) - ROM application allowed. Recall of Order No. FO/76460/2017 dated 03.08.2017 - recall on the sole ground that the appeal was required to be disposed of by the Division Bench of this Tribunal - Held that - The Misc. Application (ROA) No. 76111/2017 received by the Registry on 31.10.2017 has not been signed and verified by the respondent assessee and the Registry should not have received the unsigned application and accordingly in all fairness, the application become infractuous and is accordingly dismissed being defective by all means - there is no substance in the application for recalling of the order filed by the respondent assessee - Misc. Application for (ROA) is accordingly dismissed.

Issues:
1. Rectification of Mistake Application filed by Revenue regarding Final Order dated 03.08.2017.
2. Appeal for remanding the matter to Commissioner (Appeals) by Revenue.
3. Misc. Application filed by respondent assessee for recalling the Order dated 03.08.2017.
4. Dismissal of Misc. Application (ROA) filed by respondent assessee.

Analysis:
1. The judgment deals with a Misc. Application for Rectification of Mistake filed by the Revenue concerning the Final Order dated 03.08.2017. The Revenue sought rectification based on the grounds related to the power of remand held by the Commissioner (Appeals) as per the amending section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal reproduced relevant paragraphs from the previous order to clarify the issue raised by the Revenue.

2. The Tribunal found that the Revenue had prayed for remand in their grounds of appeal, leading to the modification of paragraph 5 of the Final Order dated 03.08.2017 to allow the appeal by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals). Consequently, the Misc. Application (ROM) filed by the Revenue was allowed by the Tribunal.

3. On the other hand, the respondent assessee filed a Misc. Application for recalling the Order dated 03.08.2017, contending that the appeal should have been disposed of by the Division Bench of the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal noted that the application was not signed and verified by the respondent assessee, rendering it defective. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the Misc. Application (ROA) filed by the respondent assessee.

4. The Tribunal emphasized that the Final Order dated 03.08.2017 did not decide the issue on merits but remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal found no merit in the application for recalling the order filed by the respondent assessee, leading to the dismissal of the Misc. Application for (ROA).

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the rectification of mistake application by the Revenue, the appeal for remand, and the dismissal of the respondent assessee's application for recalling the order, providing a detailed analysis of each issue raised before the Tribunal.

← Previous Next →