COLOURTEX Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Kamal Trivedi, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners and Mr.R.M.Chhaya, the learned additional standing counsel appearing on advance copy on behalf of the respondent No.1, 2 and 3. The dispute between the parties lies in a very narrow compass and hence, the petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal today.

(2.) This petition has been brought before this Court at a stage where, in fact, there is no order made by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal (CESTAT).

(3.) It appears that when the appeals preferred by the petitioners were heard by a Division Bench of CESTAT on 12/8/2005, the learned Members constituting the Bench could not agree and recorded dissenting opinions. Therefore, in light of provision of Section 129C(5) of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act), the difference of opinion was referred to the President of CESTAT who assigned the matter to a Third Member to hear on the point on which there was difference of opinion between the Members constituting the original Bench. It is an admitted position that the Third Member is yet to hear the matter on the difference of opinion. In the meantime, it appears that the petitioners preferred an application seeking rectification of mistake on 29/9/2005 under Section 129B(2) of the Act.