2019 (12) TMI 21 - HC - Customs

High Court limits Tribunal order to petitioner's 2017 appeal, preserving 2015 appeal.

New Era Fabrics Ltd. Versus Appellate Tribunal of Customs & Ors.

The High Court set aside the Tribunal's order and directed that it be limited to the petitioner's appeal related to the 2017 notice, clarifying that the ... Rectification of mistake - it is pointed out that the order dated 5 July 2018 of the Tribunal should be restricted only to the proceedings emanating from notice dated 28 June 2017 as the Appeal of the revenue from order of the Commissioner dated 29 September 2017 to the extent it emanated from notice dated 23 October 2015 is pending before the Division Bench of the Tribunal - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal ought to have allowed the Petitioner’s rectification application and restricted its order dated 5 July 2018 only to the show cause notice dated 28 June 2017 by which the Petitioner was aggrieved. The Tribunal could have addressed the above issue in favour of the Petitioners while disposing of the rectification application. Thus we set aside the impugned order dated 11 July 2019. The parties are ad-idem that the order dated 5 July 2018 of the Tribunal deals only with the Petitioner’s appeal and not with the Revenue’s appeal which is pending with the Tribunal. Therefore, instead of restoring the Petitioners rectification application to the Tribunal for final disposal, we make it clear that the order of the Tribunal dated 5 July 2018 is only restricted to the Petitioner’s appeal arising on account of confirmation of the show cause notice dated 28 June 2017 - petition disposed off. Issues:Challenge to order of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for rectification of mistake in previous order.Analysis:The petitioner received two show cause notices for levying Service Tax, one in 2015 and the other in 2017. The Commissioner of Service Tax issued a common adjudication order in 2017 confirming the second notice and dropping the first one. The petitioner appealed to the Tribunal against the confirmation of the second notice. The Tribunal, in July 2018, allowed the appeal and set aside the Commissioner's order, restoring all issues for adjudication.The petitioner, concerned that the Tribunal's order might have inadvertently set aside the part of the Commissioner's order in their favor, filed a rectification application. They argued that the Tribunal's order should only apply to the proceedings related to the 2017 notice, as the appeal on the 2015 notice was pending. However, the Tribunal refused to rectify the order, stating that it was dictated in open court and no apparent error existed.The respondents acknowledged that the Tribunal's order should only pertain to the appeal arising from the 2017 notice, not the one from 2015. They argued that there was no need for rectification as the Tribunal's order was correctly limited to the 2017 notice. The High Court agreed with the petitioner, stating that the Tribunal should have restricted its order to the 2017 notice only. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order and directed that it be limited to the petitioner's appeal related to the 2017 notice.Both parties agreed that the Tribunal's order only concerned the petitioner's appeal and not the pending appeal by the Revenue related to the 2015 notice. The High Court clarified that the Tribunal's order from July 2018 was solely applicable to the petitioner's appeal based on the 2017 notice. The Court disposed of the petition accordingly, ensuring that the Tribunal's order was correctly restricted to the specific appeal in question.