Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 48 - AT - Service TaxRestoration of appeal - appeal dismissed earlier for non-prosecution as well as non-removal of defects - Held that - Applicant removed defects from the appeal - Department also did not dispute this fact - Therefore, we recall our order dismissing the appeal earlier and we restore the appeal to its original number - Appeal restored.
Issues:
1. Removal of defects in a miscellaneous application (No. 83196/13). 2. Restoration of appeal dismissed for non-prosecution and non-removal of defects in a miscellaneous application (No. 388/12). Analysis: 1. The judgment first addresses the removal of defects in a miscellaneous application (No. 83196/13). The applicant's consultant confirmed the removal of defects, leading to the allowance of the miscellaneous application. This issue is resolved promptly as the defects were rectified to the satisfaction of the tribunal. 2. The second issue pertains to the restoration of an appeal that was dismissed for non-prosecution and non-removal of defects in a miscellaneous application (No. 388/12). The applicant's consultant explained that the previous authorized representative failed to take necessary steps, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. The applicant, a proprietorship concern from Jharkhand, entrusted the case to the consultant after the Power of Attorney was revoked. The tribunal considered the reasons provided, including the lack of awareness about the filing procedure, and the appeal was restored in the interest of justice. The Department did not contest the removal of defects by the applicant, leading to the restoration of the appeal to its original number. In conclusion, the judgment showcases the tribunal's consideration of procedural lapses and the interest of justice in allowing the removal of defects in one miscellaneous application and restoring an appeal in another due to non-prosecution and non-removal of defects. The decision highlights the importance of adherence to procedural requirements and the tribunal's discretion in recalling orders for the sake of justice.
|