2007 (4) TMI 144 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - Applicant has filed the ROM against the decision of tribunal in view of decision of the higher court and question arises whether higher court decision binding on the tribunal - Held yes

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake application based on subsequent Supreme Court decision binding on Tribunal.

Analysis:
The matter before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai involved a rectification of mistake application based on a subsequent Supreme Court decision, which raised the issue of whether such a decision is binding on the Tribunal. Initially, the Division Bench had remanded the case to determine the quantum of bank charges and interest on receivables against the assessee, following the decision in the case of Gomti Carbon Dioxide. However, the applicant filed a rectification of mistake application after the Supreme Court reversed the finding in Gomti Carbon Dioxide in the case of A. Infrastructure Limited v. CCE. The Tribunal referred the matter to a Larger Bench, which concluded that a subsequent decision of the higher court is indeed binding on the Tribunal.

The Larger Bench, consisting of five Members and presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Abichandani, President, CESTAT, New Delhi, determined that the subsequent decision of the higher court holds precedence. As a result, the rectification of mistake application was allowed, and the matter was referred back to the original Division Bench for further proceedings on the appeals based on merits. The decision emphasized the binding nature of subsequent higher court decisions on the Tribunal, clarifying the legal position in such situations. The Tribunal's adherence to the Supreme Court's ruling underscored the hierarchy of courts and the importance of following the latest legal interpretations in resolving disputes.

In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai highlighted the significance of adhering to subsequent decisions of higher courts, establishing a clear precedent for the Tribunal's approach to rectification of mistake applications. By upholding the binding nature of such decisions, the Tribunal ensured consistency and compliance with legal principles, ultimately guiding the resolution of the appeals before it.