Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2014 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 358 - HC - Central ExciseUse of common inputs plastic crates and Furnace Oil in the manufacture of dutiable aerated waters and exempted fruit pulp based drink ‘Slice’ - it was not possible for the appellant to ascertain the quantum of input relatable to clearance of exempted Slice – appellant reversed the entire credit availed – Whether the first respondent is right in recalling its order in the guise of exercising power under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, which provides for error apparent on the face of the record - Held that:- mistake apparent on record must be an obvious and patent mistake and the mistake should not be such which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning. In the case of T.S. Balram v. M/s. Volkart Brothers (supra), this Court has already decided that power to rectify a mistake should be exercised when the mistake is a patent one and should be quite obvious - mistake cannot be such which can be ascertained by a long drawn process of reasoning - while rectifying a mistake, an erroneous view of law or a debatable point cannot be decided - when the error pointed out is evidently of a disputed nature, the order of rectification being on an arguable issue, we have no hesitation in allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue to that extent - Decided partly in favour of Revenue.
|