2018 (8) TMI 1211 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of Mistake in Final Order for CENVAT Credit granted

Stovekraft Pvt Ltd, Rajendra J. gandhi, Managing Director, M/s. Stovekraft Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax Bangalore-III

The Tribunal allowed the rectification of a mistake in the Final Order regarding CENVAT credit, where the word 'not' was inserted in para 82 to accurately ... Rectification of Mistake - there is an error in the finding recorded in para 82 and the word 'not' should precede the word 'sustainable' - Held that:- There is an error apparent in para 82 of the Final Order dt. 14/02/2018 and therefore we allow the inserting of the word 'not' in the said para after the word 'is' and before the word 'sustainable' - ROM Application allowed. Issues:Rectification of mistakes in Final Order No.20186 & 20187/2018 regarding CENVAT credit.Analysis:The case involved a miscellaneous application for rectification of mistakes in the Final Order No.20186 & 20187/2018 dated 14/02/2018. The appeals were initially heard by a Division Bench of the Tribunal, resulting in a difference of opinion between the two members. Subsequently, the appeals were referred to the President for the constitution of a 3rd Member to resolve the matter. The 3rd Member, after hearing the case on 14/02/2018, concurred with the view of the Hon'ble Member (Judicial) and allowed the appeals with consequential reliefs. The issue in question revolved around CENVAT credit, with the Final Order stating that if duty is paid on finished goods, then CENVAT credit is allowable on raw material. The appellant had paid the duty and claimed CENVAT credit on raw material. The plea that only bills were raised and raw materials were never supplied was considered sustainable as the Department accepted the duty payment without objection. However, a discrepancy was identified in para 82 of the Final Order, where it was argued that the word 'not' should precede the word 'sustainable' to accurately reflect the conclusion. Both the appellant's counsel and the learned AR agreed that there was an error in the finding recorded in para 82, and the correction was deemed necessary. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the insertion of the word 'not' in para 82 after the word 'is' and before the word 'sustainable' to rectify the apparent error. The rectification was pronounced in open Court on 04/07/2018.