2013 (1) TMI 665 - AT - Central Excise

Restoration of appeals dismissed - non-compliance of pre-deposit ordered - Held that - As appellants have not filed any reply to the show cause notice nor they appeared before the adjudicating authority with no reason given for such callousness be that as it may, in the interest of justice, it is necessary that the appellant should be given an opportunity to file the reply and appear before the adjudicating authority in order to come to conclusion whether the appellant has the case on merit or not. Since it is the claim of the appellant that they have not been heard in the matter, it is necessary that the matter should be heard by the adjudicating authority right from the beginning and the appellant should be allowed to submit the evidences. Thus directed to file a reply to the show cause notice on or before 11.03.2013 & also to deposit an amount of Rs.15 lakhs within a period of eight weeks from today and report compliance to the adjudicating authority on 11.03.2013.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal dismissal for non-compliance of pre-deposit order, restoration of appeals, justification for absence, callous approach of appellants, opportunity to file reply and appear before adjudicating authority, direction for appellant to deposit a specific amount, hearing by adjudicating authority, compliance with pre-deposit order.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application filed by the appellant seeking restoration of appeals that were dismissed due to non-compliance with a pre-deposit order. The Tribunal noted that the stay order directing the appellant to pre-deposit the confirmed amount was passed ex-parte as no one appeared on behalf of the appellants. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance. Upon reviewing the application for restoration, the Tribunal found justification for the appellants' absence and decided to recall the final order and restore the stay petitions and appeals to their original numbers.

Further, the Tribunal observed that the appellants had been negligent in their approach by not filing a reply to the show cause notice or appearing before the adjudicating authority. Despite this, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal deemed it necessary to give the appellants an opportunity to present their case on merit. Therefore, the Tribunal disposed of the stay petitions and decided to hear the appeal, directing the appellants to file a reply to the show cause notice and appear before the adjudicating authority.

Acknowledging the appellants' claim of not being heard in the matter, the Tribunal emphasized the need for the adjudicating authority to hear the case afresh from the beginning and allowed the appellants to submit evidence. The Tribunal directed the appellants to deposit a specific amount within a stipulated time frame and report compliance to the adjudicating authority. Once the reply to the show cause notice is filed and the pre-deposit is made, the adjudicating authority will proceed with the matter after ensuring natural justice principles are followed.

In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of with the mentioned directives regarding compliance with the pre-deposit order and the process to be followed by the adjudicating authority.