9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 718X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant : Shri Willingdon Christian, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Lalatendu Patra, Authorised Representative ORDER PER : MR. P.K. DAS; The applicant filed this application for rectification of mistake in Final Order No. A/10669/2015 dated 8.05.2013. 2. The learned Advocate on behalf of the applicant fairly submits that even the Final Order dated 08.05.2013was passed on the basis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue strongly opposed the submission of the learned Advocate. He submits that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has came after the decision of the Tribunal and therefore, the Tribunal cannot review its own decision. He further submits that while passing the order by the Tribunal the legal position was in favour of the Revenue. 4. Af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... troleum Corpn. Limited (supra), we reject the appeal filed by the appellant." 5. Section 35C (2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides the Appellate Tribunal may at any time within six months from the date of order, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the records, amend any order passed by it and shall make such amendments if such mistake is brought to its notice by the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal had not considered the decision of the apex court and therefore, the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Hindustan Liver Limited (supra) would not be applicable.
6. In view of the above discussions, we do not find any merit in the application for rectification of mistake. Accordingly, it is rejected.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
