2019 (2) TMI 434 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of Mistake - apparent error in the record - Held that - There is no error apparent on record calling for rectification of mistake - ROM Application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in Final Order No. A/30750-30751/2018
Acceptance of earlier orders by the Commissioner (Appeals) by the department
Binding precedence of CESTAT's decision

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to applications for rectification of mistake filed against Final Order No. A/30750-30751/2018. The first issue raised was regarding the acceptance of earlier orders by the Commissioner (Appeals) by the department, specifically concerning the monetary limit. The applicant argued that the department had accepted the earlier orders on merits but not on monetary grounds. However, the final order did not mention the monetary limit. The tribunal, in para '6' of the final order, addressed this contention stating that the earlier order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not a binding precedent on the CESTAT, allowing for an independent decision to be made in this regard.

Regarding the second issue of binding precedence of CESTAT's decision, the final order explicitly relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Manikgarh Cement and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Limited while deciding the matter. The tribunal concluded that there was no error apparent on record necessitating rectification of mistake and rejected the applications for rectification of mistake.

In summary, the judgment clarifies the non-binding nature of earlier orders by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the CESTAT and emphasizes the reliance on relevant judicial precedents in decision-making. The tribunal's decision highlights the importance of independent assessment and adherence to legal precedents in resolving issues related to rectification of mistakes in final orders.