2005 (4) TMI 323 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Restoration of appeal dismissed for default.
2. Time limit for filing restoration application.

Issue 1: Restoration of appeal dismissed for default
The case involved an application for restoration of an appeal by M/s. La Grande Projects Ltd., which was dismissed for default in accordance with Rule 20 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. The appellant's representative argued that the appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original but was not received due to the Tribunal sending it to the wrong address. The representative only became aware of the dismissal after visiting the Tribunal's office and researching previous decisions. The appellant relied on a Gujarat High Court judgment stating that the Tribunal cannot dismiss an appeal for default of appearance. The Tribunal noted that the Final Order was sent to an address different from the one provided in the application, absolving the appellant of blame. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the restoration application and scheduled the appeal for regular hearing.

Issue 2: Time limit for filing restoration application
The respondent opposed the restoration application, arguing that it was filed more than six months after the dismissal, which they deemed unreasonable. Citing a previous Tribunal decision, the respondent emphasized the importance of a reasonable time limit for filing such applications to maintain the finality of decisions. They highlighted another case where an application filed after four-and-a-half years was rejected. However, the Tribunal found the appellant's submissions valid, noting that the Final Order was sent to an incorrect address despite the correct address being provided in the application. As such, the Tribunal concluded that the delay in filing the restoration application was justified, and the appeal was reinstated for regular hearing.

In summary, the judgment dealt with the restoration of an appeal dismissed for default, considering the circumstances surrounding the failure to receive the Final Order. The Tribunal balanced the need for a reasonable time limit for filing restoration applications with the appellant's valid reasons for the delay, ultimately allowing the appeal to proceed to regular hearing.