2017 (8) TMI 706 - AT - Service Tax

Restoration of appeal - delay in filing appeal - Held that - It is apparent from the conduct of the applicant as explained by the AR that the applicant has no interest in prosecuting the matter. Further, the demand involved in this appeal is more than ₹ 3, Crores. It is presumed that the application is filed to buy time and to protract the proceedings by being absent repeatedly. It shows that there is no seriousness of litigation and total abuse of process of law - delay not condoned - appeal cannot be restored.

Summary

Issues:
1. Restoration of appeal dismissed due to delay application.
2. Applicant's continuous absence and lack of interest in prosecuting the matter.
3. Grounds for dismissal of the restoration application.

Analysis:
1. The judgment deals with an application for restoration of an appeal that was dismissed by the Tribunal due to the dismissal of the condonation of delay application. The applicant sought to restore the appeal, which was initially dismissed by the Tribunal in a Final Order. The delay in filing the appeal was 483 days, attributed to the resignation of the staff member responsible for service tax matters without informing the office about the receipt of the Order-in-Original.

2. Despite the issuance of a notice, the applicant failed to appear for the hearing, displaying a continuous absence and lack of interest in prosecuting the matter. The applicant neither replied to the show cause notice nor attended the personal hearing. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's behavior indicated a lack of seriousness in litigation and an abuse of the legal process. The total demand involved in the appeal exceeded &8377; 3 crores, further emphasizing the significance of the case.

3. The Tribunal, after hearing the arguments of the Id. AR and carefully examining the records, dismissed the restoration application. It was observed that the applicant's conduct, as highlighted by the Id. AR, demonstrated a clear lack of interest in pursuing the matter. The Tribunal inferred that the application seemed to be a tactic to delay proceedings and prolong the litigation process by repeatedly being absent. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the restoration application and decided to dismiss it, emphasizing the seriousness of litigation and the abuse of legal procedures.