2019 (4) TMI 167 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake applications granted, submissions to be provided, reconsideration scheduled to ensure accurate record.

The Tribunal allowed the applications for rectification of mistake, directing the appellant's counsel to provide a copy of the written submissions to the ... Rectification of mistake - mistake apparent on record or not - Held that:- In the case in hand, the case of the appellant is that while passing the order this Tribunal has not considered the correct facts of the case as per their written submissions, therefore, there is a mistake apparent on record while taking the decision, therefore, as written submission filed by the appellant, correct fact has not been recorded in the order passed by this Tribunal, therefore, it is a mistake apparent on record and required to be rectified. Although the appellant filed written submission on 06.11.2017 but the same has not been taken on record as not placed in the file before this Tribunal, in that circumstances, the written submissions filed by the appellant could not be considered, therefore, the applications for rectification of mistake allowed, in that circumstances, the matter is required to be re heard for recording the correct facts of the case and thereafter to take decision. The appeals are to be listed for reconsideration on 15.04.2019. Issues:Rectification of mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal due to non-consideration of written submissions by the appellant.Analysis:The appellants filed applications seeking rectification of a mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal, contending that their written submissions were not considered before the order was issued. The appellant argued that the failure to consider their submissions constituted a mistake apparent on record. They relied on a previous decision by the Tribunal in support of their argument. On the contrary, the Learned Authorized Representative (AR) opposed this, citing a different case where non-consideration of submissions was not deemed a ground for rectification of mistake.After hearing both parties, the Tribunal considered the submissions. The Tribunal noted that in the case cited by the AR, it was not a matter of recording incorrect facts, whereas in the present case, the appellant claimed that the correct facts were not considered in the order due to the non-inclusion of their written submissions. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument, stating that the failure to record the correct facts based on the written submissions constituted a mistake apparent on record. Additionally, it was observed that although the appellant had filed written submissions, they were not placed in the file before the Tribunal, leading to their non-consideration.Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the applications for rectification of mistake, directing the appellant's counsel to provide a copy of the written submissions to the Learned Authorized Representative and include them in the court record. The matter was deemed to require a rehearing to ensure the correct facts of the case were recorded before a decision could be made. The appeals were scheduled for reconsideration on a specified date.This judgment highlights the importance of ensuring that all relevant submissions are duly considered and recorded in the decision-making process to avoid mistakes apparent on record and uphold the principles of natural justice.