2018 (11) TMI 1280 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - Held that - There is inadvertent error in the order by referring that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeal) which has already been referred in the case impugned order. Thus there appears to be a factual mistake, which needs to be corrected by way of ROM in this case - OM application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistake in the order under Section 35(2) of the Central Excise Act and Rule 41 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982.

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi involved a miscellaneous application for rectification of a mistake in the order dated 11/05/2018 under Section 35(2) of the Central Excise Act and Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The issue raised was regarding the mention of a clarification in the order that was not properly considered by the Commissioner (Appeal). The Ld. Advocate for the appellant highlighted the error in the order where the Commissioner (Appeal) had not adequately dealt with the TRU clarification dated 26/04/2017. The Ld. AR representing the Revenue argued against the rectification, stating that the Commissioner (Appeal) should reconsider the issue. The Tribunal found an inadvertent error in the order, referring to the Commissioner (Appeal) incorrectly, and decided to allow the miscellaneous application for rectification. The final order was recalled, and the appeal was scheduled for a final hearing on 20/11/2018.

In summary, the judgment dealt with rectifying a mistake in the order under the Central Excise Act and CESTAT Procedure Rules, focusing on the proper consideration of a clarification by the Commissioner (Appeal). The Tribunal acknowledged the error in the order and allowed the miscellaneous application for rectification, leading to the recall of the final order for further proceedings.