2018 (8) TMI 1213 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - Rule 41 of CESTAT(Procedure) Rules, 1982 - in the case of M/S. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS) 2017 (10) TMI 341 - CESTAT BANGALORE , the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant and set aside the impugned order which denied the refund of ₹ 5,32,440/- and ₹ 4,89,600/- - Held that - Once the impugned order has been set aside with consequential relief, the Assistant Commissioner should not have denied the refund claim of ₹ 4,89,600/- merely on the ground that the same has not been specifically mentioned in the Final Order dt. 24/08/2017. The original authority is directed to grant the refund of ₹ 4,89,600/- which the applicant/appellant is entitled to in view of the Final Order in the case of M/S. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS) 2017 (10) TMI 341 - CESTAT BANGALORE - application disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistake in Final Order regarding refund claims under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
The appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking rectification of a mistake in the Final Order passed by the Tribunal. The appellant had filed two refund claims for amounts &8377; 5,32,440/- and &8377; 4,89,600/- under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal allowed the appeal but observed that only one refund claim was rejected, whereas, in reality, both claims were rejected by the Commissioner(Appeals) - Orders-in-Appeal No.98 & 99/2007-CE. The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and granted consequential relief to the appellant. However, the Department sanctioned the refund of only &8377; 5,32,440/- and denied the refund of &8377; 4,89,600/-, citing that it was not specifically allowed by the Tribunal.

Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted that the Final Order dated 24/08/2017 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order denying both refund claims. The Assistant Commissioner wrongly denied the refund of &8377; 4,89,600/- solely because it was not explicitly mentioned in the Final Order. The Tribunal found that once the impugned order is set aside with consequential relief, the denial of the refund claim of &8377; 4,89,600/- was unjustified. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the application and directed the original authority to grant the refund of &8377; 4,89,600/- to the appellant in accordance with the Final Order No.21789/2017 dated 24/08/2017. The application was thus disposed of, and the operative portion of the order was pronounced in Open Court on 23/07/2018.