9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Stay application and appeal filed by M/s. Omega Agro Ltd. and Directors challenging confiscation and duty imposition. 2. Non-appearance of parties leading to multiple adjournments. 3. Failure of the Official Liquidator to appear and implead within the stipulated time. 4. Dismissal of the appeal of the Company under Rule 22 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. 5. Decision on the dismissal of the appeal and granting adjournment to Directors' penalty matter. Analysis: 1. The case involved M/s. Omega Agro Ltd. and Directors appealing against the confiscation of 30 drums of Epichlorohydrin, duty imposition, and penalties. The matter was scheduled for a hearing on various dates due to non-appearance, leading to adjournments. 2. Despite multiple adjournments, the Official Liquidator of the High Court of Bombay failed to appear and implead within the specified timeframe. The Director requested an adjournment for the stay application related to the penalty imposed, which was granted as a final chance for a hearing. 3. The Dispute Resolution noted that the Company's appeal could not proceed under Rule 22 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules due to the Official Liquidator's non-impleadment within the designated period. The Company's appeal was dismissed as abated in accordance with the rules. 4. The Tribunal considered the submissions made by the Departmental Representative (DR) and observed the lack of response from the Official Liquidator. As a result, the appeal dismissal request was accepted, leading to the dismissal of the stay application and appeal of M/s. Omega Agro Ltd. under Rule 22. 5. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the stay application and appeal of M/s. Omega Agro Ltd. as abated under Rule 22 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. The Directors' penalty matter was granted an adjournment for a final hearing on a specified date, providing them with a last chance for resolution.
|
