Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 1064 - CESTAT NEW DELHIReview of order - Valuation of Niacin - Captive consumption - job work - manufacture niacin and such niacin captively consumed in the manufacture of ‘niacin feed premix’ - Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules 2000 – Entitlement for Exemption under Notification No.10/96 – Eligibility for Cenvat credit – Held that:- The application is really a review application in the guise of an application for rectification of mistakes. Various contentions raised in the application calls for extensive examination of material facts and evidence as well as contentions of the parties made at the time of hearing appeal and nothing a mistake apparent from record by a glance. Tribunal does not have power of review under law since it becomes functus officio soon after passing an order. In the absence of any power to review like a Civil Court, it is not permitted in law to disturb the result of the appeal on merit by a review. Appellant prays to review entire order and decide the appeal again on merit which is not permitted by law. In order to amend an order under the powers of rectification of mistake conferred on the Tribunal by law the mistake should be apparent from record and appreciable without a detailed exercise for discovery thereof. Contentions in the Misc. Application shows that detailed exercise is called for by the Appellant to appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case. Such exercise is permissible only if power of review is conferred on the Tribunal. But such a power is absent in the scheme of the law of Excise. Court specifically held that recalling the entire order would mean passing of a fresh order. That does not appear to be the legislative intent. In view of the provisions and judicial pronouncement indicated hereinabove, Hon’ble Court held that the power to rectify a mistake under Section 254(2) cannot be used for recalling the entire order. No power of review has been given to the Tribunal under the Income-tax Act. Thus, what it cannot do directly cannot be allowed to be done indirectly. If the assessee was aggrieved, it was open for him to approach the appropriate forum without asking the Tribunal review the entire judgment delivered by it earlier in present application of the applicant calling for review of the entire order to replace the earlier decision is a review exercise called for. Therefore that is liable to be dismissed. - Decided against assessee.
|