2015 (3) TMI 1101 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of costs - cost was imposed for non-appearance on the scheduled day of hearing - Held that - Between June 2010 to May 2014 the matter was adjourned by Bench from time to time for various reasons and the adjournments were not on the request of the Appellant. On some occasions directions were issued to the department for supply of relied upon documents as well as non-relied upon documents. The other occasion on which the adjournment was granted on the appellant s request by the Bench was on 27.06.2014 when the matter was adjourned to 11.07.2014. On 11.07.2014 the appellant s counsel could not come as according to him he was seriously ill and was suffering from high fever and in this regard the records of his treatment in form of prescription given by CGHS Doctor as well as Private Physician has been placed on record. We have no reason to doubt the genuineness of these documents. - there is merit in the appellant s plea for waiver of the cost imposed by the Tribunal s order - Decided in favour of assessee.

Issues:
1. Waiver of cost imposed by the Tribunal on the appellant.
2. Justification for non-appearance of the appellant's counsel.
3. Consideration of medical documents for non-appearance.
4. Opposition to the waiver of cost by the Department.
5. Tribunal's authority to modify the interim order.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed a misc. application seeking the waiver of the cost of Rs. 25,000 imposed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had directed the appellant to deposit the said amount to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund due to repetitive adjournments sought by the appellant, prejudicing the Revenue's interest. The Tribunal considered the circumstances and decided to waive the imposed cost after reviewing the appellant's plea and the records.

2. The appellant's counsel had requested adjournment on the grounds of the counsel's illness, supported by medical documents. The Tribunal acknowledged the genuine reason for non-appearance on the specified date due to the counsel's high fever. The appellant's counsel pointed out that adjournments were not solely at their request, and the Tribunal found merit in the explanation provided.

3. The medical documents presented by the appellant's counsel included prescriptions from both a CGHS Doctor and a Private Physician, verifying the counsel's illness. The Tribunal accepted the authenticity of these documents and considered them in the decision to waive the imposed cost, recognizing the genuine reason for the non-appearance.

4. The Department, represented by its counsel, opposed the appellant's misc. application for the waiver of cost. The Department argued that the cost could not be waived by the Tribunal and suggested that the appellant should have filed an appeal before the appropriate forum. However, the Tribunal disagreed with the Department's stance and proceeded to grant the waiver after evaluating both parties' submissions.

5. The Tribunal addressed the issue of its authority to modify the interim order dated 11.07.2014, which imposed the cost on the appellant. Despite the Department's objection, the Tribunal asserted its ability to modify the order and decided to waive the cost of Rs. 25,000 imposed on the appellant. The Tribunal allowed the misc. application in favor of the appellant, considering the circumstances and the genuine reasons presented for the non-appearance.

This detailed analysis outlines the key issues addressed in the legal judgment regarding the waiver of costs and the considerations made by the Tribunal based on the presented arguments and evidence.

← Previous Next →