2024 (4) TMI 1221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2023 dated 30th November, 2023 was moved under section 129B (2) of Customs Act, 1962 read with rule 41 of CESTAT Procedure Rules 1982, heard. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has mentioned that the appeal was heard by the Division Bench of this Tribunal on 31.07.2023. During the course of hearing the applicant also submitted its synopsis for the detailed submissions made by it in the appeal memo and the oral arguments. It was appellants submission that the impugned goods are Wristwatches classifiable under CTH 9102 and not under CTH 8517 and thus are eligible to the benefit of 'Nil' rate of basic customs duty in terms of Sl. No.955 of Notification No. 152/2009 Cus dated 31.12.2009. Without prejudice to the above, it was also submitted th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble point of law is not the mistake apparent on the face of record nor the ROM application amounts to an appeal for re-hearing or re-deciding the particular issue. Application is thus prayed to be dismissed. 4. Having heard the rival contentions, we observe it to be settled that it is not permissible for anyone to re-open a proceeding under the garb of application for rectification of the earlier order. It is only an error apparent on the face of record which can be rectified even in terms of section 129B (2) of Customs Act and in terms of Rule 41 of CESTGAT Procedure Rules. An error apparent on the face of record means an error which strikes on mere looking and does not need long drawn out process of reasoning on points where there may ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o fold 1) The argument taken, in alternate, about notification No.151/2009 was incorporated in the ground of appeals as well as in both the submissions written/oral but the impugned final order is silent about Notification No. 151. 2) The another aspect raised is that as per the said Notification No. 151/2009 the benefit of 'Nil' rate of duty is available for all goods under CTH 8517 and the final order has held that the smart watches imported by the appellant are classifiable under 8517. 7. As far as first contention is concerned, in the light of above discussed law the absence of discussion about the plea taken based on Notification No. 151/2009 is an error apparent on record. Whether in terms of said Notification the....