Tribunal Rectifies Mistake in Final Order on Central Excise Duty Demand

The Tribunal granted the Revenue's application for rectification of a mistake in the Final Order concerning Central Excise duty demand for goods cleared to Nepal. The Revenue demonstrated a discrepancy in the RT-12 return, prompting a recall of the Final Order for rehearing. The Tribunal acknowledged the new evidence and scheduled a rehearing to address the extended period for demanding Central Excise duty based on the revised information provided.

---

---

Issues: Application for rectification of mistake in Tribunal's Final Order regarding the demand of Central Excise duty for goods cleared to Nepal.

Analysis:
1. Issue of Rectification Application by Revenue:
The case involved an application by the Revenue seeking rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's Final Order regarding the demand of Central Excise duty for goods cleared to Nepal. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal, in its initial order, had held that there was no mala fide intention to evade payment of duty by the appellants as they had shown the value of clearance to Nepal in their RT-12 return. However, the Revenue produced a copy of the RT-12 return for March 2000, which did not indicate the value of export to Nepal, contradicting the Tribunal's earlier finding. Therefore, the Revenue requested a recall of the Final Order for rehearing based on the newly produced RT-12 return.

2. Contentions of the Departmental Representative:
Mrs. Charul Barnwal, representing the Revenue, argued that the Tribunal's decision was based on the appellants' RT-12 return, which allegedly showed the value of goods cleared to Nepal. However, she pointed out that the RT-12 return submitted to the Department for March 2000 did not mention the value of export to Nepal, challenging the basis of the Tribunal's earlier decision. She supported her argument by presenting a photocopy of the RT-12 return to substantiate the discrepancy.

3. Response of the Respondent's Advocate:
On the other hand, Shri Suresh Agarwal, representing the respondent, opposed the Revenue's prayer for rectification. He contended that the RT-12 return produced by the Revenue was not part of the original record during the arguments, making the alleged mistake not apparent on record. He further claimed that the newly submitted RT-12 return was manipulated and an afterthought, as indicated by a letter from an employee stating that he was forced to submit a copy without the summary that was originally included in the RT-12 return submitted to the Department in April 2000.

4. Tribunal's Decision and Order for Rehearing:
After considering the arguments from both sides, the Tribunal found merit in the Revenue's submission regarding the discrepancy in the RT-12 return. As the newly produced RT-12 return did not contain the summary supporting the earlier decision, the Tribunal decided to recall its Final Order and scheduled a rehearing on the matter of the extended period of limitation for demanding Central Excise duty. The case was post for rehearing on 8-11-2004 to address the issue raised by the Revenue regarding the demand of Central Excise duty based on the revised information provided.

---