2011 (3) TMI 621 - HC - Central Excise

Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Appeal was dismissed on account of non-appearance of the appellant on numerous count - Held that - as per the judgment of devision Bench of this Court in case of Viral Laminates Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India 1998 -TMI - 44913 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD , wherein Bench took the view that Tribunal has no power to dismiss the appeal in default - Even in case of non-appearance of the party, appeal should be decided on merits - Therefore answer the question in favour of the appellant - Consequently, appeal before the Tribunal is restored and may be disposed of in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Non-appearance of the appellant leading to dismissal of appeal before CESTAT.
2. Whether the Tribunal has to decide the issue on merits in accordance with Law to secure the ends of justice or otherwise.

Issue 1: Non-appearance of the appellant leading to dismissal of appeal before CESTAT:
The appellant had preferred Appeal No. C/897/2005 before CESTAT, which was dismissed due to non-appearance on multiple occasions. The impugned judgment highlighted the lack of representation by the appellant during the scheduled hearings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution.

Issue 2: Whether the Tribunal has to decide the issue on merits in accordance with Law to secure the ends of justice or otherwise:
The significant question of law considered was whether the Tribunal is obligated to decide the issue on its merits in line with the law to ensure justice. The appellant's counsel cited a previous Division Bench judgment in the case of Viral Laminates Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, where it was held that the Tribunal lacks the authority to dismiss an appeal in default. The counsel argued that even in cases of non-appearance, appeals should be adjudicated on their merits. Following the precedent set in the case of Viral Laminates Pvt. Ltd., the High Court set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal, emphasizing that appeals must be decided on their merits.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the Tribunal must decide the appeal on its merits in accordance with the law. Consequently, the appeal before the Tribunal was restored, and it was directed to be disposed of in compliance with the legal provisions. The Tax Appeal was thus disposed of accordingly, ensuring that justice prevails in the adjudication process.