2017 (12) TMI 485 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - The applicant submits that the order is not as per the observation made by the bench in open court at the time of final hearing held on 28.03.2016. Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Application has been filed for recalling of the final order dated 28.03.2016 and also for rectification of the mistake in the said order - Held that - It is evident from the order that no dictation was given in the open court on 28.03.2016. Since the order was dictated afterwards and the appeal was partly allowed to the extent of reducing the quantum of redemption file from ₹ 20,000/- to ₹ 5000/-, it cannot be said that the bench observed differently at the time of hearing with regard to the benefit of duty demand as well as for imposition of penalty - ROM application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in the Final Order

Analysis:
The applicant filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification of a mistake in the Final Order passed by the Tribunal. The applicant argued that during the final hearing, the Bench made specific observations regarding the demand of Central Excise duty and penalty, which were not reflected accurately in the Final Order. The applicant contended that the order did not align with the observations made by the Bench during the hearing.

During the hearing, the Bench had stated that the appeal was partly allowed, and detailed order to follow. However, it was noted that no dictation was given in the open court on that day. The Final Order, which was pronounced later, confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty and the penalty, while reducing the quantum of redemption fine. The Tribunal found that since the order was dictated afterwards and the appeal was partly allowed as per the Final Order, there was no discrepancy between the observations made during the hearing and the Final Order.

The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, concluded that there was no merit in the applicant's Miscellaneous Application for rectification of mistake and recalling the Final Order. It was determined that the Final Order was in line with the proceedings during the hearing, and therefore, the application was dismissed.

In summary, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification of a mistake in the Final Order, as it was found that the Final Order was consistent with the proceedings during the hearing, where the appeal was partly allowed with a reduction in the quantum of redemption fine.