2003 (12) TMI 537

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. This is an application by M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. for rectification of mistake in Tribunal s Final Order Nos. 332-333/2002-B, dated 12-8-2002 [2002 (146) E.L.T. 427 (Tribunal)]. 2. Shri V. Sridharan, learned Advocate, submitted that a point was raised before the Appellate Tribunal that in respect of the vehicles which have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce has also been placed on the decision in Unique Resin Industries v. CCE, Baroda, 1994 (74) E.L.T. 587 (T). He, therefore, submitted that as the motor vehicles have been exported, no Central Excise duty can be demanded; that this mistake may be rectified by calling the Final Order for passing suitable orders setting aside the duty demand in respect of vehicles exported by them. 3. Shri Virag Gu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the duty paid on the components manufactured and captively consumed by them. It has also been mentioned in our Final Order in question that Appellants are at liberty to claim the benefit of Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, if they deem fit before the proper Authority which would take necessary action in accordance with law. We, therefore, dispose of the present application by observing that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X