TMI Blog1995 (3) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng in detail on the points raised in the application, we are constrained to record at the outset that the Competent Authority in making the application seems to be completely oblivious of the distinction between what are treated to be mistakes "apparent from the record", visa-vis, those which are churned out by some argumentative process and strained reasoning, where at best, another view could be possible as per the contender's opinion. Such an understanding on the part of the applicant in this case, namely, the Competent Authority, was all the more necessary because he happens to be a statutory authority under the Act, and can be called upon to exercise power, in given situations under the very same section 20 of the Act, for rectificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after recording our discussion and the conclusion reached, we should have remanded the case back to the Competent Authority, with certain directions. In support of this plea, reliance has been placed on rule 14(2) of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property) Rules, 1977. We, however, find that these Rules were superseded, and substituted by rule 21(1) of the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property (Procedure) Rules, 1986. It is amazing to find that the Competent Authority has not cared to keep himself abreast of the Rules which are now in force, and which were applicable and operative at the time of hearing of the appeals, and making of the present application. In place of rule 14(2), e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The present application, therefore, to say the least, is not only in ignorance of the existing rules, but also based on a misreading of the relevant rules and misconception on point of law, as to the scope and ambit of a petition under section 20 of the Act, namely, rectification provisions. Even under rule 14(2) of the now extinct Rules, on which the Competent Authority placed reliance, it was nowhere made mandatory on the part of the Tribunal to remand a case as was urged by the representative of the Competent Authority, during the hearing before us. It is only in the event of the Tribunal's finding that : " The Competent Authority has omitted to frame or try any issue or to determine any question which appears to the Tribunal to be e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 ITR) : "A mistake apparent on the record must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long-drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may be conceivably two opinions. A decision on a debatable point of law is not a mistake apparent from the record. " Even on the merits what we held, on the basis of our understanding of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Attorney-General of India v. Amratlal Prajivandas, AIR 1994 SC 2179, was that on the facts of the present case, when the property sought to be forfeited was stated to be, in the reasons recorded, the property of the sons, though characterised as illegally acquired, and even when proceedings had been initiated against the det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
