9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Final Order No. A-536/Kol/2002, dated 17-2-2002 has classified the woven grey tyre cord fabrics manufactured under Heading No. 59.09 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act instead of Heading 59.02 as claimed by them; that even if it is assumed that the yarn supplied to the appellants was not high tenacity yarn, still the grey tyre cord fabrics manufactured by them would not be classifiable under Heading 59.09 in view of Explanatory Notes of H.S.N., Board s Circular dated 10-8-1988 and in view of the fact that Heading 59.09 relates to textile products and articles; that as per HSN Explanatory Notes, woven tyre cord fabric not made from high tenacity yarn would be covered by Heading 54.08; that the Tribunal had not taken into consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well-settled proposition that an act of Court should not prejudice a party. It must be left to the Tribunal to reopen the appeal if it finds that it has omitted to deal with an important ground urged by the party. Where the Tribunal fails or omits to deal with an important contention affecting the maintainability/merits of the appeal, it must be deemed to be a mistake apparent from the record which empowers the Tribunal to reopen the appeal and rectify the same if it is so satisfied. Reliance has also been placed on the following decisions : (i) C.I.T. v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 1998 (172) ITR 158 (MP) (ii) Income Tax Officer v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 1965 (58) ITR 634 (All.) 3. Learned Advocate also mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record and the debatable issue could not be subject of an order of rectification. Rectification of mistake does not envisage the rectification of an alleged error of judgment. Reliance has also been placed on the decision in the case of Lily Thomas v. Union of India, AIR 2000 S.C. 1650 wherein the Apex Court has held that error must be such which, is apparent on the face of the record and not an error which is to be finished out and searched. It has further been held by the Supreme Court that error apparent on the face of the proceedings is an error which is based on clear ignorance or disregard of the provisions of law . such error is an error which is a patent error and not mere a wrong decision. Reliance has also been placed on the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two opinions. The rectification of mistake does not envisage rectification of an alleged error of judgment. What is submitted by the applicant in the present application is that the final decision, reached by the Tribunal was wrong. The arguments advanced by the applicants at the time of hearing the Appeal have not found favour with the Tribunal as it has decided that the impugned product manufactured by them is classifiable under Heading 59.09 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. It has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Vasudeo Vishwanath Saraf v. New Education Institute, AIR 1986 S.C. 2105 that it is not necessary that order must be a lengthy one recording in detail all the reasons that played in the mind of the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
