2004 (10) TMI 413

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Smt. Bhaghya Devi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J) (Oral)]. -   These applications were filed by the assessee seeking rectification of what is said to be a "mistake apparent from the record" in Final Order No. 702 & 703/2003, dated 9-9-2003 [2003 (158) E.L.T. 316 (T)] passed by this Bench in Appeal Nos. C/123 & 124/2002. 2. We have carefully read o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ect of some of the components was not adjusted. Such excess payments amount to Rs. 2,78,009/-. It is the above omission that is pointed out as mistake in our final order. This omission which has been explained to us by the Counsel is conceded by the SDR. We are also convinced that the final order did not take into account the appellants' specific plea that the duty paid in excess on some of the it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppropriate duty leviable thereon as per such classification. Such excesses totalling to Rs. 2,78,009/- have to be adjusted against the total demand of duty on the entire consignment. We note that this plea of the appellants has not been contested by the respondent. Therefore, an amount of Rs. 2,78,009/- requires to be appropriated towards the demand of duty on the subject goods. It is up to the Co....