Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (12) TMI 495

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Tribunal order dated 15.09.2017 fails to examine two aspects in their defense. He pointed out that in Para 4(i) and 4(ii), two assertions made by the appellant before the Tribunal were recorded however, no findings in respect of the same have been given in the order. He argued that in these circumstances, the order of the Tribunal needs to be rectified for this apparent mistake. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vadilal Gases Limited vs. UOI - 2015 (0) AIJEL-HC-234668 and the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Akram Ansari vs. Chief Election Officer & Ors - (2008) 2 SCC 95. 3. Ld. AR opposed the application. He argued that the CESTAT has examined every issue in detail as c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ecision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinod Solanki vs. UOI - 2009 (233) ELT 0157 (SC). The Tribunal also rejected the defense of the appellant to the effect that if they had any malafide they would have removed or torn off the pages of said civil supply register. The Tribunal also examined the appellant's letter dated 05.05.2003 to M/s. Maruti Enterprises giving details of the dispatches in the month of March to April 2003. The Tribunal examined the invoice-cum-challans in the name of M/s. Maruti Enterprises as well as the statement of Shri Nandlal Meghraj Shah of M/s. Maruti Enterprises. After examining all these facts and evidences the Tribunal observed as follows:- "6.6. Further this appears to be the case where the asse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the evidences. 6. As regards the reliance of the ld. Counsel on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s. Vadilal Gases Limited vs. UOI (supra), it is seen that the said case was not a case for rectification of mistake. It was a case where the principles of natural justice were not followed and therefore, the Hon'ble High Court remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals). Whereas, in the instant case, we find that principles of natural justice have been followed and findings on all aspects have been given by the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Akram Ansari vs. Chief Election Commissioner and others (supra). In the said case the Hon' .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ication application were also advanced before the CESTAT when the appeal was heard at an earlier stage. The arguments not accepted at an earlier point of time were accepted by the CESTAT after hearing the rectification application. It is strange as to how a particular decision taken by the CESTAT after considering all the relevant facts and submissions made on behalf of the parties was changed by the CESTAT. There was no mistake apparent on record when the CESTAT did not accept a submission of the respondent-assessee to the effect that the officer appointed to value the goods manufactured by assessee should not have been engaged as a cost accountant. 18. We are not impressed by the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the respondent. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... committed a mistake which was subsequently rectified by considering and appreciating the evidence which had not been considered earlier. As stated hereinabove, in the instant case, the position is absolutely different. 21. This Court has decided in several cases that a mistake apparent on record must be an obvious and patent mistake and the mistake should not be such which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning. In the case of T.S. Balram v. M/s. Volkart Brothers (supra), this Court has already decided that power to rectify a mistake should be exercised when the mistake is a patent one and should be quite obvious. As stated hereinabove, the mistake cannot be such which can be ascertained by a long drawn process of reasoni .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates