2017 (3) TMI 923 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of Mistake - The ld. Counsel for the applicant has highlighted a few points which according to them are in favor of the appellants but pleaded that these points have not been specifically discussed in the impugned order - Held that - the impugned order has been passed after consideration of all evidence on record including those highlighted by the applicant - It cannot be said that by not specifically discussing a few of the points highlighted, the order has been passed in error - A re-appreciation of the evidence at the stage of rectification of mistake would amount to re-writing the order, which is not permissible, since, the Tribunal has become functus officio with the issue of the impugned order - ROM application dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistake application citing errors in the impugned order.

The appellant filed a rectification of mistake application to correct errors in the impugned order. The errors highlighted included the misrepresentation of transit declaration forms as appellant's documents, failure to discuss crucial statements and particulars, and lack of evidence regarding procurement of raw materials. The appellant's counsel argued that these points were in favor of the appellant but were not specifically addressed in the impugned order. The Departmental Representative contended that the impugned order considered all evidence on record, advising the appellant to challenge it through an appeal if aggrieved. The Member (Technical) examined the arguments and found that the impugned order was based on a comprehensive evaluation of all evidence, including the points raised by the appellant. The Member concluded that not discussing specific points did not invalidate the order, as re-evaluating evidence during rectification would amount to rewriting the order, which is impermissible once the Tribunal issues the impugned order. Consequently, the rectification of mistake application was dismissed.