TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rejects rectification application, emphasizes proper appeal procedures for orders involving fines</h1> <h3>GOLDSTAR STRIPS P. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD-I</h3> GOLDSTAR STRIPS P. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD-I - 2009 (233) E.L.T. 87 (Tri. - Ahmd.) Issues:Rectification of mistake in the order, Authorization to file appeal, Validity of appeal, Quashing of order, Alternative remedy available.Analysis:The case involved an application for rectification of mistake in an order filed by M/s. Goldstar Strips Pvt. Ltd. The Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I had imposed fines, penalties, and duties, which were later modified by the Commissioner. However, an appeal was filed by a Deputy Commissioner who was not authorized to do so. The Commissioner rectified this by authorizing the Assistant Commissioner to file two appeals. One of the appeals was dismissed by the Tribunal, Mumbai, without considering the existence of another appeal. The applicant sought rectification based on the prior order, arguing that the subsequent order did not survive as the appeal was not filed by the proper officer.During the hearing, it was acknowledged that the appeal from Mumbai was not filed by the authorized officer, and there were indeed two conflicting orders against M/s. Goldstar Strips Pvt. Ltd. It was noted that the appeal seeking to restore penalties on the Director had been rejected in the order under question. The presiding judge opined that while rectification of mistakes was permissible, it should not result in the wholesale quashing of the order, especially when an alternative remedy like an appeal was available. Consequently, the application for rectification of mistake was rejected, and the second order was upheld.In conclusion, the tribunal decided that the rectification of mistake application could not invalidate the subsequent order entirely, especially when there was an alternative remedy through an appeal. The judgment emphasized the importance of following proper authorization procedures for filing appeals and the availability of legal remedies rather than resorting to rectification of mistakes to challenge orders.
TaxTMI 