2014 (9) TMI 540 - HC - Service Tax

Challenge to the order of the tribunal restoration of appeal - tribunal has dismissed the appeal for default owing to the failure to comply with the order on the applications for waiving the pre-deposit - Held that - Such discretionary orders exercised by the Tribunal are not to be interfered with under Article 227 of the Constitution of India which is sought to be invoked by the petitioner in the instant case. - The enlargement of time sought for by the petitioner does not exceed ten months and every endeavour shall be made to have a lis disposed of on merits. - I am not prepared to hold by any stretch of imagination that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction in restoring the appeals for disposal on merits later. - Decided against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Extension of time for pre-deposit by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.
2. Invocation of Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
3. Dismissal of the Writ Petition.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the issue of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's power to extend the time for pre-deposit in accordance with the proviso to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal, through Rule 41 of the Appellate Tribunal (Procedure Rules), restored appeals dismissed for default due to non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements. The Tribunal exercised its discretion by allowing the application to waive the pre-deposit on the condition of a deposit of &8377; 10,00,000. The judgment emphasizes that such discretionary orders are not to be interfered with under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Tribunal's decision to extend the time for pre-deposit and restore the appeals for disposal on merits is deemed within its jurisdiction.

2. The judgment further delves into the invocation of Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner to challenge the Tribunal's decision. It notes that the petitioner's request for an extension of time does not exceed ten months and emphasizes the importance of disposing of cases on their merits. The judgment asserts that the Tribunal did not exceed its jurisdiction in restoring the appeals for later disposal on merits. However, the judgment directs the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of specific Appeal Nos. ST/510-511/2009 within a period of two months.

3. Finally, the judgment concludes by dismissing the Writ Petition, thereby affirming the Tribunal's decision to extend the time for pre-deposit and restore the appeals for further proceedings. The directive for expeditious disposal of the mentioned appeals underscores the importance of timely resolution in legal matters.