2017 (4) TMI 798 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - calculation of interest liability for violation of Rule 3(5) of CCR, 2004 - Held that - Tribunal has considered all the aspects of the case and after analyzing the evidences recorded its finding. Therefore, reconsidering the issues now raised would result into review of the order, a power not conferred on the Tribunal - ROM application dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistake in the order dated 01.6.2016 regarding interest liability under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the issue revolved around a Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's order dated 01.6.2016 related to interest liability under Rule 3(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant contended that interest liability should be calculated only after 180 days from the date of clearance of inputs without the reversal of credit, following the procedure under Rule 4(5)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that all aspects of the case had been addressed in the previous order, and revisiting the issue would amount to reviewing the order, a power not vested with the Tribunal as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C.C.E., Belapur, Mumbai vs. RDC Concrete (India) P. Ltd. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's stance, emphasizing that it had already considered all aspects of the case, analyzed the evidence, and reached a conclusion. Therefore, entertaining the new issues raised would constitute a review of the order, a power not within the Tribunal's jurisdiction, as highlighted in the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of RDC Concrete (India) P. Ltd. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification was deemed devoid of merit and dismissed.