AREN CO. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have filed the present ROM application seeking rectification of mistake in the Final impugned Order No. 848/2000 -A, dated 16 -10 -2000 [2000 (128) E.L.T. 223 (Tri.)].

(2.) The learned Counsel has contended that the value enhanced by the Customs Authorities for the purpose of payment of duty, could not be taken for licence purpose and in view of the law laid down in the case of Glaxo Laboratories India Ltd., 1984 (17) E.L.T. 284, as well as in M/s. Taj Trading Co. and M/s. Om Parkash Galhotra v. CC, Chandigarh, (Final Order Nos. 634 to 638/1996 -A, dated 15 -2 -1996 and M/s. Harish Co. v. CC, Chandigarh Final Order No. 1492/1996 -A, dated 30 -4 -1996. Therefore, the observations of the Tribunal to the contrary in the impugned final order in Para 9, deserve to be ' rectified. But, we are unable to accept this contention of the learned counsel. The bare perusal of the impugned Final Order shows that the ratio of the law laid down in the case of M/s. Taj Trading Co. and M/s. Om Parkash Galhotra supra, had been referred and considered. The other cases now cited by the learned Counsel, referred to above, were not even relied upon at that time. It is a question of interpretation of the Imports Exports (Control) Act read with Import (Control) Order, 1955, as to whether the licence value can be taken to be the same, which had been determined for the purpose of payment of duty or not. The Tribunal has token the view on this issue in affirmative by observing that it could be taken into account as there could not be two values; one for the purpose of duty and the other for the purpose of licence.

(3.) It is well settled that no ROM is maintainable under the law on a debatable point of fact or law as observed by the Apex Court in the case of Income Tax Commissioner v. Hero Cycles, AIR 1998 SC 155. The appellants through the present ROM application want the recall of the impugned Final Order of the Tribunal, which is not permissible under the law. In our view, there is no merit in the ROM application and the same is ordered to be dismissed.