[2025:RJ-JP:9508-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7999/2018 M/s Shri Karni Kripa Road Lines Through Its Proprietor Shri Kan Singh S/o Kishandan, Addressed At Near Milan Talkij, Road No. 14, V.k.i, Jaipur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus Commissioner, Central Excise And Service Tax, Jaipur-I, Ncrb Building Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur. ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8067/2018 Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, Chief Manager, M/s Autolite India Limited, D-469, Road No. 9A, Vki Area, Ja, R/o. 5, Vidhyut Nagar-A, Ajmer Road, Jaipur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus Commissioner, Central Excise And Service Tax, Jaipur, Ncrb Building Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur. ----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8068/2018 M/s Autolite India Limited, D-469, Road No. 9A, Vki Area, Jaipur Raj. Through Its Authorized Signa, R/o. 5, Vidhyut Nagar-A, Ajmer Road, Jaipur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax, Jaipur-1, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur Raj. ----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8069/2018 Mr. Mahipal Gupta, Managing Director, M/s Autolite India Limited, D-469, Road No. 9A, Vki Area, Jai, R/o. 5, Vidhyut Nagar-A, Ajmer Road, Jaipur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus [2025:RJ-JP:9508-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-7999/2018] Commissioner, Central Excise And Service Tax, Jaipur, Ncrb Building Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kinshuk Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 04/03/2025 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):- 1. These petitions are being decided by common order as the facts and issues involved are similar. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from DBCWP No.7999/2018. 2. This petition is filed seeking quashing of order dated 20.01.2017 passed by Central Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘the tribunal’) dismissing the application for rectification. 3. The brief facts are that the petitioner is a transporter. The petitioner was carrying the material of the Autolite India Ltd. from Pant Nagar to Jaipur. The goods reached Jaipur on 18.03.2012. On 19.03.2012, on checking the trucks carrying the material were found parked at a place other than the place where the goods were to be unloaded. Penalty was imposed as also confiscation of the goods was ordered. Aggrieved petitioner filed appeal and was unsuccessful before the tribunal. The application for rectification filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the impugned order, hence, the present petition. [2025:RJ-JP:9508-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-7999/2018] 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on the ground that the transit declaration form submitted were documents of the appellants whereas these were generated by the State Government. It is further argued that the statement of the Chief Manager was not properly appreciated. The fact that the goods were lying at the premises was not discussed by the Tribunal further there was no evidence of unaccounted procurement of raw material. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent defends the impugned order and submits that the appeal was decided considering the facts and evidence adduced. 6. The scope of interference in a rectification application is limited. The issues raised by the petitioner for rectification were in fact the grounds of challenge against the order passed in appeal. Re-appreciation of evidence was sought, which is not the scope of rectification. The tribunal rejected the application for rectification stating that the order in appeal was passed after considering the evidence. It was rightly held that there was no error apparent on the record and there cannot be a re-appreciation of evidence in rectification proceeding. 7. No case is made out for interference in the impugned order. The writ petitions are dismissed. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Chandan/31-34 Reportable: Yes