2017 (5) TMI 1009 - AT - Central Excise

Restoration of appeal - Doctrine of merger - failure to make pre-deposit - Held that - the said Miscellaneous Application is hit by doctrine of merger as the appellant had moved before the Hon ble Allahabad High Court, and Hon ble High Court in its final order dated 03/02/2010, have dismissed their appeal for non making of pre-deposit, However the said fact of Detention Memo is a fact prior to dismissal by the Hon ble Allahabad High Court - appeal not mainatainable - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
Restoration of Central Excise Appeal for non-compliance with pre-deposit orders.

Detailed Analysis:
The Applicants/Appellants filed a Miscellaneous Application for restoration of their Central Excise Appeal, which was dismissed due to non-compliance with pre-deposit orders. The Tribunal had directed the appellants to deposit a specific amount as pre-deposit for stay of the disputed demand and penalty. The appellants failed to make the pre-deposit due to financial constraints, leading to the dismissal of their appeal initially. Subsequent orders and legal actions followed, including a Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition and another appeal, but the appellants still could not arrange the required amount for deposit. The appellants argued that the value of their assets detained by the Central Excise Officers should be considered to protect the revenue's interest. They also cited a High Court ruling stating that appeals should not be dismissed for failure to make pre-deposit.

Upon reviewing the contentions and the case record, the Tribunal found that the Miscellaneous Application for restoration was not maintainable due to the doctrine of merger. The appellants had previously approached the High Court, which dismissed their appeal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement. The fact regarding the detention of assets by the Central Excise Officers was deemed to be a pre-existing circumstance before the High Court's dismissal. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the restoration application was not valid and subsequently dismissed it.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the principle of the doctrine of merger and ruled that the Miscellaneous Restoration Application for the Central Excise Appeal was not maintainable due to prior legal actions and the High Court's decision. The appellants' failure to comply with the pre-deposit orders led to the dismissal of their appeal, and the detention of assets was not sufficient to warrant restoration. The Tribunal's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the legal proceedings and relevant facts, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the restoration application.