9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 940 - AT - Central ExciseRectification of Mistake - Held that - The corrected sentence mistake pointed out by Ld. Counsel Stand rectified. Review of order - Held that - Re-visiting in the aspect of applicability of the Rule 26/Rule209A will amount to review of our order which is not permissible in law. ROM allowed in part.
Issues: Rectification of Mistake, Imposition of Penalty under Central Excise Rules
Rectification of Mistake Issue: The judgment pertains to an application for Rectification of Mistake filed by the applicant. The appellant's counsel argued that a previous order incorrectly stated that M/s. PPL, a 100% EOU, had not filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which was inaccurate. The counsel provided evidence of an appeal filed by M/s. PPL that was dismissed for non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements. The appellant contended that since M/s. PPL did not handle the goods in question, penalties under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, and Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944, should not have been imposed. The Assistant Commissioner supported the Tribunal's original order, except for the mention of M/s. PPL not filing an appeal. Upon review, the Tribunal acknowledged the error in the order and corrected the statement regarding M/s. PPL's appeal filing history, rectifying the mistake in the order. Imposition of Penalty under Central Excise Rules Issue: The judgment also addressed the imposition of penalties under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, and Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The appellant's counsel argued that since there was no handling of goods and only a paper transaction involved, penalties should not have been imposed. However, the Tribunal found that a detailed finding in para 5 of the original order explained the appellant's liability for the penalties under the mentioned rules. The Tribunal determined that revisiting the applicability of Rule 26 and Rule 209A would amount to a review of the original order, which is impermissible in law. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that no rectification was required regarding the imposition of penalties, and the Rectification of Mistake application was partly allowed in the specified terms. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 21.02.2019, with the rectification made to the order.
|
