2013 (10) TMI 506 - AT - Customs

Penalty - Export of pan masala and gutakha - Held that - Appellants are not interested in pursuing their matter inspite of number of notices have been issued to them. Even notice was issued for today s hearing. I find that sufficient time was given to them. Notice for 18.4.2013 was duly acknowledged by the appellant. Further notices have been issued to give sufficient time to the appellant to appear before the Tribunal. There is constant non-appearance of the appellant before this Tribunal - appeal is liable for dismissal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Attempted export of pan masala and gutakha in plastics sachets and pouches in contravention of Plastic Waste Rules.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to the attempted export of pan masala and gutakha in plastics sachets and pouches, violating the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011. The original adjudicating authority imposed a redemption fine of Rs.3.50 and a penalty of Rs.1 lakh, later reduced to Rs.2.50 lakh, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Despite multiple notices, the appellant failed to appear before the Tribunal, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the matter. The appellant was given ample opportunities, with notices issued on various dates, including 18.4.2013, 25.4.2013, and 7.5.2013. The Tribunal noted the constant non-appearance of the appellant, leading to the conclusion that the appellant was not interested in pursuing the case. Consequently, the appeal was deemed liable for dismissal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. The final decision of the Tribunal was to dismiss the appeal, as pronounced in the open court.

This judgment underscores the importance of compliance with environmental regulations, specifically the Plastic Waste Rules, in the context of exporting goods. It also highlights the significance of actively participating in legal proceedings and responding to notices issued by the Tribunal. Non-appearance and lack of interest in pursuing the case can lead to adverse consequences, such as dismissal for non-prosecution. The judgment serves as a reminder of the legal obligations and procedural requirements that must be adhered to in matters concerning regulatory compliance and legal proceedings before the Tribunal.