TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als). The present miscellaneous application is only with reference to unjust enrichment. The Revenue has categorically stated that they are not on the merit of the refund claim. As such, we cannot consider the impugned final order of the Tribunal as having some infirmity either by way of apparent error of record on fact or law, calling for a modification proceedings. Application dismissed being not maintainable. - Excise Misc. Application No.50875 of 2016 in Appeal No.3913 of 2005 - MO/50306/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 2-6-2017 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Ms. Suchitra Sharma, Authorized Representative (Jt. CDR) - for the appellant. Ms. Reena Khair, Advocate - for the Res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so that the correct law is laid down. 4. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid . 2. Subsequently, the Revenue has filed the present miscellaneous application on 14/06/2016 with the prayer that the review application may be allowed in terms of the direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh as contained in its order dated 21/01/2016 and further prayer that the final order of the Tribunal may be modified considering the fact that the decision of the Tribunal in Grasim Industries (supra) on the basis of which the impugned order has been passed against the appellant Revenue was overruled by the decision of the Larger Bench in SRF Ltd. Vs. CCE (supra) and appeal filed against the same be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground of limitation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that :- 19. It is true that the period of limitation specified in terms of Sub-Section (2) of Section 129(B) of the Customs Act is required to be observed but the Tribunal failed to notice that it has inherent power of recalling its own order if sufficient cause is shown therefor. The principles of natural justice, which in a case of this nature, in our opinion, envisage that a mistake committed by the Tribunal in not noticing the facts involved in the appeal which would attract the ancillary and/or incidental power of the Tribunal necessary to discharge its functions effectively for the purpose of doing justice between the parties, were required to be complied with. 20. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded. If this were not so, anomalous result would follow. 7. In reply, the learned Counsel for the respondent referring to para 6 of the judgment in M.P. Steel Corporation (supra) states that for granting the relief under Section 14 of limitation Act, 5 conditions have to be met as stated in the said para and out of the said conditions, the Revenue does not satisfy the condition that the failure of the prior proceeding was due to defect of jurisdiction or other causes of like nature. Accordingly, she prays for dismissing the rectification/review application. 8. Having considered the rival contentions under the fact and circumstances we are satisfied that as the said judgment of SRF Ltd. was not relied by either of the parties, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
