9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tu on its own. The period of limitation of six months was substituted for a period of four years by the Finance Act 2002 with effect from 11.05.2002. We are concerned with this post amendment limitation of six months only - The application for rectification apparently can be filed either by Revenue Authority or by the other party to the appeal (the Assessee concerned). The provision does not even provide for a suo-motu rectification by the learned Tribunal. Therefore, restricting the application of a period of limitation only if the learned Tribunal itself undertakes such rectification proceedings cannot be applied, as contended by the learned counsel for the Assessee. Admittedly, in the present case, the orders sought to be rectified was p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Division Bench of this Court on 08.12.2011, by which, the impugned order of CESTAT dated 16.06.2011 was set aside and the appeal was restored to the learned Tribunal to consider the application of the Assessee filed under Section 35C(2) of the Act. Upon such directions, the learned Tribunal again passed the order on 17.07.2012, dismissing the rectification application filed by the Assessee, as barred by limitation. 4.The findings of the learned Tribunal, as contained in paragraph 4 of the said order, are quoted below for ready reference: "In this case, the final order was passed by this Tribunal on 19.02.2010 and the application for ROM was filed by the applicant on 23.03.2011. In that view, the application for ROM itself has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s held by the Karnataka High Court reported in 2011 (266) E.L.T.163 (Kar.) and the CESTAT, WEST ONAL BENCH, MUMBAI reported in 2010 (262) E.L.T.507 (Tri-Mumbai) and the CESTAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, Bangalore reported in 2007(7) S.t.R.142 (Tri- Bang)? 2. Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai is correct in holding that the service tax for the period from 15.3.2005 to 15.6.2005 is payable by the appellant by applying the amended provision of Rule 3(2) of Export of Service Rules 2005 which is applicable only from 15.6.2005? 3. Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai is correct in not taking into consideration of the point that the appellant alone has been discriminately treated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise] or the other party to the appeal." 9. The period of limitation of six months was substituted for a period of four years by the Finance Act 2002 with effect from 11.05.2002. We are concerned with this post amendment limitation of six months only. The application for rectification apparently can be filed either by Revenue Authority or by the other party to the appeal (the Assessee concerned). The provision does not even provide for a suo-motu rectification by the learned Tribunal. Therefore, restricting the application of a period of limitation only if the learned Tribunal itself undertakes such rectification proceedings cannot be applied, as contended by the learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
