2010 (10) TMI 540 - AT - Central Excise

Restoration of appeals - the applicant suffered unforeseen financial crisis due to general market conditions and global recession, no details have been disclosed for delay in filing the applications for restoration of appeals - Merely because the applicants have complied with interim order after the disposal of appeals, that cannot be a ground for restoration of appeals - Absence of the applicants in the Tribunal also discloses lack of interest in pursuing the matter. Hence, the applications are dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Non-compliance with pre-deposit requirement, delay in filing application for restoration of appeals, compliance with directions after appeals were disposed off, lack of interest in pursuing the matter.

Non-compliance with pre-deposit requirement:
The appeals in question were dismissed due to the non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement by an order dated 19th May 2009. The application for restoration of appeals was filed on 24th February 2010, with the only explanation provided being the unforeseen financial crisis due to general market conditions and global recession. However, no details were disclosed regarding the delay in filing the application, and there was no application for condonation of delay. The lack of specific information regarding the cause of delay and the absence of the applicants in the Tribunal indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the matter, leading to the dismissal of the applications.

Compliance with directions after appeals were disposed off:
The applicants mentioned in their application that they had managed to comply with the directions issued in the appeals while disposing of the stay applications. These applications were disposed of on 16th March 2009 with a direction to deposit a specific duty amount within two months. However, the applicants failed to deposit the amount as per the stay order, leading to the dismissal of the appeals under Section 35 F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal emphasized that once the appeals were disposed of, the interim order did not subsist and got merged into the Final Order. Merely complying with the interim order after the disposal of appeals was not sufficient grounds for restoration of appeals, especially considering the lack of disclosed particulars regarding the cause of delay.

Lack of interest in pursuing the matter:
The Tribunal noted that the absence of the applicants during the proceedings further indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the matter. The failure to provide specific details regarding the cause of delay, coupled with the lack of presence in the Tribunal, led to the dismissal of the applications for restoration of appeals. The Tribunal emphasized that compliance with the interim order post-appeal disposal was not a valid ground for restoration and that the overall circumstances pointed towards a lack of diligence in pursuing the appeals.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the applications for restoration of appeals due to non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement, lack of specific details regarding the cause of delay, and the overall lack of interest displayed by the applicants in pursuing the matter. Compliance with directions after the appeals were disposed of was not considered a sufficient ground for restoration, as the interim order ceased to exist once the appeals were finalized.