2010 (2) TMI 674 - AT - Indian Laws

Clubbing of Demand Notice - The Demand Notices are based on the returns filed by the appellants and, therefore, Rule 8 cannot be invoked in this case - The appellants has argued that no opportunity was given and, therefore it de hors the rule and as such the Demand Notices are not sustainable under law. Appeal cannot be filed against more than one Demand Notice - Each appeal has to be filed against one Demand Notice as per Rule 7(1) of the Textiles Committee (Appeal to the Tribunal) Rules, 1976 and so the clubbing of Demand Notices in one appeal is contrary to the Rule and as such not maintainable - The Order dated 20-12-2007 of this Tribunal in TCA No. 69/2004 will have no application in this appeal as Rule 8 is not applicable to this appeal - There is no merit in the appeal - Hence, the appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against multiple Demand Notices
- Applicability of Rule 8
- Compliance with Rule 7(1) of the Textiles Committee (Appeal to the Tribunal) Rules, 1976

Analysis:
1. Appeal against multiple Demand Notices:
The appellants filed an appeal against three Demand Notices issued on different dates for varying amounts covering different periods. The appellants argued that no opportunity was given, rendering the Demand Notices unsustainable under the law. However, the Respondent's counsel contended that filing appeals against multiple Demand Notices in one appeal is against the law. The Tribunal held that each appeal must be filed against a single Demand Notice as per Rule 7(1) of the Textiles Committee (Appeal to the Tribunal) Rules, 1976. Therefore, the clubbing of Demand Notices in one appeal was deemed contrary to the Rule and not maintainable.

2. Applicability of Rule 8:
The appellants claimed that Rule 8 was not applicable to their case as no opportunity was provided before issuing the Demand Notices. The Respondent's counsel argued that Rule 8 had no application since the returns were filed by the appellants themselves. The Tribunal concurred, stating that the Demand Notices were based on the returns filed by the appellants, and thus, Rule 8 could not be invoked in this scenario. Consequently, the appeal against the Demand Notices on the grounds of lack of opportunity was dismissed.

3. Compliance with Rule 7(1) of the Textiles Committee Rules:
The Respondent's counsel highlighted Rule 7(1) of the Textiles Committee (Appeal to the Tribunal) Rules, 1976, which mandates that each appeal must be filed against a single Demand Notice. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adherence to this rule and clarified that the clubbing of multiple Demand Notices in one appeal was not permissible. Citing previous tribunal decisions and the specific rule, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the Order in a previous case did not apply to the current appeal due to the inapplicability of Rule 8. The appeal was ultimately dismissed without costs.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment emphasized the procedural requirements for filing appeals against Demand Notices, highlighting the necessity of adherence to the relevant rules and regulations governing such appeals.