2008 (11) TMI 249 - SC - Customs

Rectification of mistake - Held that - The Tribunal did not consider the matter on merit. The Tribunal failed to take into consideration that, ipso facto, in a case of this nature provisions of Section 129B of the Customs Act as such has no effect. Label of an application is not decisive for consideration by the Tribunal as to whether a case has been made out to hear the application on merit, particularly, having regard to the grounds set out therein. Appeal allowed in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of writ petition by High Court on the ground of not exercising extraordinary jurisdiction.
2. Non-compliance with conditions under a government notification leading to imposition of redemption fine and penalty.
3. Application for rectification of mistake dismissed by Tribunal on the ground of limitation.
4. Tribunal's failure to consider all contentions raised by appellants.
5. Applicability of inherent power of Tribunal to recall its order.
6. Interpretation of limitation provisions under the Customs Act.
7. Exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis:
1. The appellants, a Charitable Trust running a hospital, imported equipment under a government notification granting customs duty exemption subject to certain conditions. An investigation revealed non-compliance, leading to the imposition of redemption fine and penalty upheld by the Tribunal.
2. The Tribunal dismissed an application for rectification of mistake as time-barred, stating it lacked power to condone the delay. The High Court upheld this decision, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.
3. The Supreme Court noted that the Tribunal failed to consider all facts and contentions raised by the appellants, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive review of the case.
4. The Court highlighted the inherent power of the Tribunal to recall its order if sufficient cause is shown, emphasizing the principles of natural justice and the necessity to ensure justice between the parties.
5. While acknowledging the limitation provisions under the Customs Act, the Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have considered the application filed within a reasonable time, especially given the appellants' genuine pursuit of remedies.
6. In exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court set aside the Tribunal's judgment and directed a fresh hearing on the application, emphasizing the need for a thorough consideration of the case on merit.

This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the legal intricacies involved and the Supreme Court's thorough examination of the issues at hand, ensuring justice and fairness in the adjudication process.