2013 (11) TMI 30 - HC - Central Excise

Restoration of Appeal - Rejection from Committee of Disputes to entertain the appeal Held that - Following Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India 2011 (2) TMI 3 - Supreme Court - the Committee on Disputes (COD) was held to have outlived its utility consequent upon which the Supreme Court recalled its earlier directions on the subject The order of the Tribunal restoring the appeal was passed in the facts of the present case Decided against Petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of appeal by CESTAT due to lack of clearance from Committee on Disputes.
2. Restoration of appeal by Tribunal.
3. Challenge to restoration order based on a letter from Union of India.
4. Interpretation of Supreme Court judgment on the Committee on Disputes' utility.
5. Petition seeking restoration of dismissed appeals citing Tribunal's precedent.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the dismissal of an appeal by the CESTAT due to the absence of clearance from the Committee on Disputes. Subsequently, the Tribunal restored the appeal on an application by the Revenue, but the appeal was later dismissed on merits.

2. The Petitioner argued that the Revenue did not challenge the final dismissal order of the appeal. However, the petition was filed based on a letter from the Union of India questioning the restoration order by the Tribunal.

3. The High Court considered the legal position in light of a Supreme Court judgment in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India, where the Committee on Disputes was deemed to have outlived its utility. The Supreme Court recalled its earlier directions on the subject, leading to a change in the legal landscape.

4. The Revenue expressed concerns that allowing applications for restoration of dismissed appeals based on the Tribunal's precedent could lead to judicial indiscipline. However, the High Court noted that the law was now governed by the Supreme Court judgment in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd., rendering the concerns raised by the Revenue irrelevant.

5. Ultimately, the High Court found no reason to entertain the petition, as the law had been clarified by the Supreme Court judgment regarding the Committee on Disputes. The petition was disposed of based on the observations made, emphasizing the changed legal framework following the Supreme Court's decision.