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>Application for Restoration of ROM Application No. 151/2000 Dismissed Due to SC Decision; Tribunal Lacks Competence to Alter Order.</h1> <h3>JAYPEE REWA CEMENT Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RAIPUR</h3> JAYPEE REWA CEMENT Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RAIPUR - 2008 (229) E.L.T. 215 (Tri. - LB), 2009 (16) S.T.R. 398 (Tri. - LB) Issues:Application for restoration/revival of ROM Application No. 151/2000 after recall of Misc. Order, dismissal of application as infructuous, main grievance related to admissibility of modvat credit on explosives and furnace oil, decision of the Tribunal set aside by the Supreme Court, request for recall of order to consider the issue of modvat credit on furnace oil.Analysis:The judgment pertains to an application for restoration/revival of a ROM Application after the dismissal of a Misc. Order. The applicant had filed the Misc. Application for modification of a Final Order, which was dismissed as infructuous based on the counsel's statement. The Supreme Court had decided on the issue raised in the ROM application, rendering it non-existent in the eye of the law. The Tribunal's order sought to be modified was set aside by the Supreme Court, making any modification by the Tribunal inappropriate.In addressing the applicant's grievance regarding the admissibility of modvat credit on explosives and furnace oil, the Tribunal noted that the Larger Bench dismissed the entire appeal even though the issue of furnace oil was not before it. The Tribunal opined that the applicant should have sought rectification/modification of the final order before approaching the Supreme Court. As the decision of the Tribunal merged with the Supreme Court's decision, the Tribunal lacked the competence to modify the order, leading to the dismissal of the application for restoration.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the application, stating that restoration of the ROM would not serve any purpose as the Tribunal could not make any modifications to the order due to the decision of the Supreme Court. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court on a specified date.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues involved, the Tribunal's reasoning, and the ultimate decision rendered in the case.
TaxTMI 