1998 (4) TMI 286 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application regarding interpretation of Rule 57F(1)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Analysis:
The applicants filed a ROM application seeking rectification of a Final Order related to the interpretation of Rule 57F(1)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The issue revolved around the utilization of inputs and the credit allowed in respect of duty thereon. The applicants argued that the Order-in-Original required them to follow Central Excise Procedures as manufacturers of the inputs. They contended that Rule 173C, which mandates filing a Price List, should have been followed, and the non-filing of the Price List invoked an extended period due to alleged suppression of facts. Additionally, the applicants referenced Rule 9A and its application in conjunction with Rule 9 concerning the removal of excisable goods. The majority judgment in the case of CCE v. American Auto Service was discussed, highlighting differing views on the interpretation of legal provisions.

The Tribunal carefully reviewed the ROM application and the arguments presented by the applicants. It emphasized that the scope of a ROM is limited to rectifying mistakes apparent from the record and does not extend to a review of the order or recalling it without specific reference to a particular mistake. The Tribunal noted that all issues raised by the applicants had been thoroughly addressed in the original Order, including detailed discussions on relevant case law and legal provisions. After considering all facts and arguments, the Tribunal concluded that there was no merit in the ROM application and dismissed it accordingly.