9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Restoration of appeal, Delay in filing restoration application, Requirement of permission from High Powered Committee
In the present case, the issue before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, NEW DELHI was the restoration of an appeal by M/s. S.A.I.L. which was earlier rejected for not producing the requisite permission from the High Powered Committee as per the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ONGC v. CCE, 1992 (61) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). The restoration application mentioned that the necessary permission had already been granted by the Committee in 1994. The learned SDR argued that the application for restoration was filed after a significant delay of 5 years and emphasized that the permission had been granted in 1994, which was not brought to the Tribunal's notice earlier. In the detailed analysis, the Tribunal considered the submissions of the learned SDR and observed that the delay of 5 years in filing the restoration application should not be a ground to deny the restoration of the appeal. While acknowledging that the applicants should have been more vigilant in pursuing their matter, the Tribunal held that the right to appeal cannot be forfeited solely due to a delay in filing the restoration application. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled its earlier order and restored the appeal to its original number. The appeal was scheduled for regular hearing on 25th October 2004. Overall, the judgment highlights the importance of timely action in legal proceedings while also affirming the fundamental right to appeal. The Tribunal's decision to restore the appeal despite the delay underscores the principle of ensuring access to justice and upholding procedural fairness in legal matters.
|
