ALEMBIC LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Uday Joshi for Trivedi and Gupta, Id. Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Malkan appearing for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4. The dispute between the parties is confined to a limited issue and hence, with the consent of the learned Counsel the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal today. Rule. Mr. Malkan waives service.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner, manufacturer of Drugs claimed exemption qua Roxythromycin cleared during September, 1996 to December, 1996 and Nimesulide cleared during September, 1996 to December, 1997 vide Notification No. 8/96 -C.E., dated 23 -7 -1996. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) vide its order dated 11 -3 -2005 (Annexure -A) held that the petitioner was entitled to exemption qua Nimesulide but rejected the petitioner's claim in so far as Roxythromycin is concerned. The petitioner moved an application seeking rectification of mistake and by order dated 20 -5 -2005 the application came to be rejected, because according to CESTAT in absence of any glaring mistake apparent on the face of the record the claim for reconsideration could not be entertained.

(3.) MR . Malkan has submitted that the respondent authorities have sought clarification from the Tribunal as to whether the documents were there on record of the Tribunal or not. However, it is not necessary to await any such clarification when learned Advocate has made a statement at the bar.