2015 (6) TMI 14 - HC - Central Excise

Restoration of appeal - Dismissal of the applications of the appellants for extension of time to deposit the amounts as a condition precedent to the maintainability of the appeal - Held that - There was a delay of only 7 days in complying with the orders requiring the appellants to deposit the amounts. The application for extension of time filed on 22.04.2013 and the application for restoration were, however, dismissed by the order of the Tribunal dated 26.09.2013 impugned in this appeal. - It would be grossly inequitable and unfair to deny the appellants an opportunity of having their case heard on merits on account of their having delayed in complying with the order by just 7 days. The application for extension dated 22.04.2013 was pending when the appeal was dismissed on 23.04.2013 for non-compliance with the said orders. - The concluding words to secure the ends of justice are wide enough to cover cases such as these viz. to grant an extension of time to deposit an amount or to restore appeals dismissed on account of the failure to comply with the orders of pre-deposit. - Appeal restored.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against CESTAT order for restoration and extension of time for deposit - Delay in depositing required amounts - Jurisdiction of CESTAT to grant extension and restore appeal.

Analysis:
The appellants filed an appeal before CESTAT against a demand raised by the Commissioner. The appeal required depositing specific amounts as a condition precedent. Despite extensions granted, the appellants failed to deposit the amounts within the specified time frame. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance. The appellants then deposited the entire amounts after a delay of 7 days and applied for restoration of the appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the application for extension and restoration, leading to the current appeal.

The key issues raised were whether the rejection of the restoration application and the delay in depositing the amounts were justified in law. The Court noted that the delay was minimal (7 days) and that the application for extension was pending when the appeal was dismissed. The Court emphasized the need for equity and fairness, highlighting that denying an extension for such a short delay would be unjust. The Court also addressed the jurisdiction of CESTAT to grant extensions and restore appeals.

The Court referred to Section 86(6A) of The Finance Act, 1994, which requires a fee for applications for restoration of appeals. The Court interpreted this provision to imply that CESTAT has the power to restore appeals dismissed for any reason, including non-compliance with deposit orders. Additionally, Rule 41 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982, empowers the Tribunal to make necessary orders to secure the ends of justice, which includes granting extensions for depositing amounts and restoring dismissed appeals.

Ultimately, the Court allowed the appeal, answering the substantial questions of law in favor of the appellants. The appeal was restored to the file of CESTAT for a hearing on merits, emphasizing the importance of ensuring justice and fairness in such matters.