2018 (6) TMI 521 - AT - Central Excise

Restoration of appeal - appeal was dismissed for non-appearance of appellant - denial of SSI exemption by clubbing the clearances - Held that - The present appeal is of the year 2003 and the matter has been adjourned several times. The appeal in respect of Unit-I was disposed in 2005. The said matter is still pending before the Hon ble High Court - On the date of hearing there was no representation on the part of appellant or counsel. Even a request for adjournment was not made. The appellant has not put forward sufficient reason for non-appearance and therefore the application for restoration of the appeal is devoid of merits - application for restoration of appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Restoration of appeal, denial of SSI exemption, clubbing of clearances, non-appearance of counsel, pending writ petition, common Order-in-Original, statutory time limit, condonation of delay, non-prosecution.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, the issue revolved around the restoration of an appeal dismissed due to non-appearance of the appellant's counsel. The appellant sought restoration of the appeal concerning the denial of SSI exemption by clubbing clearances of Unit-II with another unit, Unit-I. The appellant's counsel was unable to attend the hearing due to a family funeral, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The appellant argued that since the appeal for Unit-I was pending before the High Court and both appeals arose from a common Order-in-Original, restoration should be granted.

The respondent opposed the application, stating that the appellant had multiple opportunities to present the case, and the appeal for Unit-I was dismissed for being time-barred without sufficient grounds for condonation of delay. The respondent argued that the dismissal for non-prosecution was justified as neither the appellant nor the counsel appeared on the hearing date.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal found that the appellant failed to provide adequate reasons for non-appearance and noted that the appeal had been adjourned several times since 2003. The appeal for Unit-I was disposed of in 2005 and was still pending before the High Court. The Tribunal dismissed the restoration application, emphasizing the lack of merit due to the appellant's failure to present a valid reason for non-appearance and the absence of a request for adjournment on the hearing date. The application for restoration of the appeal was consequently dismissed by the Tribunal.