9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Quashing and setting aside Tribunal's order dismissing Appeal No. E/4388/95. 2. Quashing and setting aside Tribunal's order declining restoration of Appeal No. E/4388/95. Analysis: Issue 1: The petitioner, a government undertaking, was engaged in construction activities and faced a demand for excise duty and penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa. The petitioner appealed to the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal on 25th January 1999, citing refusal of adjournment requests. The petitioner filed an application for restoration, which was dismissed due to lack of prosecution. The Tribunal's decision was based on the belief that the counsel should have proceeded with the case despite difficulties in obtaining instructions. However, the High Court found that the petitioner was not served the notice of hearing due to the closure of its office in Goa, depriving them of a fair hearing. The High Court ruled that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal and held that sufficient cause existed for the petitioner's absence. Therefore, the High Court quashed the Tribunal's order and directed a fresh hearing within 12 weeks. Issue 2: Following the dismissal of the restoration application, the petitioner filed another application, which was also declined by the Tribunal. The Tribunal restored a different appeal but declined to restore Appeal No. E/4388/95. The High Court found that the Tribunal's reasoning for refusal was flawed as the petitioner had valid reasons for non-appearance. The High Court held that the Tribunal's decision to decline restoration was unsustainable. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the Tribunal's orders, and directed a fresh hearing of Appeal No. E/4388/95 within 12 weeks with proper notice to the petitioner.
|
