2019 (4) TMI 1209 - AT - Customs

Maintainability of appeal - absence of the appellant and counsel - monetary amount involved in the appeal - HELD THAT - Due to the continuous absence of the appellant and counsel, it is presumed that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Further, the amount involved is only ₹ 76,000/- and as per the provisions of Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944, the appeal is liable to be dismissed on monetary limits. The appeal is dismissed both on the ground of non-prosecution and also on monetary limit.

Summary

Issues: Non-appearance of appellant for hearing, continuous absence leading to dismissal, monetary limit under Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944

In the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, the appeal was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the appellant for the hearing despite notices being issued. The appellant and counsel had previously requested adjournments on multiple dates, indicating a lack of interest in prosecuting the matter. The continuous absence of the appellant and counsel led to the presumption that they were not interested in pursuing the appeal. Additionally, the amount involved in the case was only &8377; 76,000, falling within the monetary limits specified under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of non-prosecution and also due to the monetary limit being exceeded. The operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court, finalizing the dismissal of the appeal.