9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 1297 - SC - Central ExciseRecall of order - Valuation - correctness of ex-factory price - Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules 1944 - HELD THAT - The basis on which the CESTAT has taken a decision, namely, the earlier order of the CESTAT dated 3 December 2009 is flawed since the order relied on has been recalled. The proceedings are remanded back to the CESTAT in view of the inadvertent error which has cropped up in the impugned judgment and order - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Appeal against CESTAT judgment and order dated 14 July 2016 - Recall of CESTAT order dated 3 December 2009 - Adjudicatory authority's confirmation of demand under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules 1944 - Penalty under Rule 173Q - Flawed decision based on earlier recalled order. Analysis: The Supreme Court heard appeals arising from a CESTAT judgment and order dated 14 July 2016 in Appeal Nos. E/901/2008 and E/906/2008. The adjudicatory authority had confirmed a demand of ?1,26,29,491 under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules 1944, along with a penalty of ?15,00,000 under Rule 173Q. The CESTAT allowed the appeal of the assessee on 3 December 2009, stating that the ex-factory price was genuine and the demand confirmation was incorrect. Subsequently, the Revenue filed an application for recall, which was granted on 12 June 2012, leading to both appeals being listed for hearing. In the impugned judgment and order dated 14 July 2016, the CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal based on its earlier order from 3 December 2009, overlooking the fact that the order had been recalled in 2012. The Supreme Court found the decision flawed as it relied on a recalled order and remanded the proceedings back to the CESTAT to rectify the inadvertent error. The appeals were allowed, and the impugned judgment and order were set aside, restoring Appeal Nos. E/901/2008 and E/926/2008 to the CESTAT for fresh disposal, with no order as to costs. The Court clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties on merits are preserved for further proceedings.
|
