Tribunal dismisses rectification applications for stay order errors under Central Excise Act.

The tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous applications seeking rectification of the stay order under Section 35F, as they were not covered under the scope of Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal clarified that Section 35C(2) allows rectification of mistakes in final orders under Section 35C(1), not stay orders under Section 35F. The absence of the appellant during the proceedings led the tribunal to proceed with the applications on merit.

---

---

Issues: Application under Section 35C(2) for rectification of stay order.

The judgment deals with applications under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for rectification of a mistake apparent from the record in relation to a stay order dated 18th January, 2010, which dismissed the appellant's stay applications. The tribunal decided to proceed with the applications on merit due to the absence of the appellant despite being served notice. The Departmental Representative argued that the rectification order must be passed within six months from the date of the original order, citing a judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court. The tribunal noted that Section 35C(2) allows for rectification of mistakes in orders passed under Section 35C(1), which are final orders disposing of the appeal. The tribunal clarified that the mistake apparent from records can only be rectified in respect of a final order under Section 35C(1).

The tribunal emphasized that the order in question was a stay order passed under Section 35F, not an order under Section 35C(1). Therefore, the provisions of Section 35C(2) could not be applied for rectifying a stay order under Section 35F. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous applications seeking rectification of the stay order, as they were not covered under the scope of Section 35C(2). The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court by the Member (T) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI.

---