9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 578X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BY : Mrs. T.F. Irani, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Hitesh Shah, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. - In this case vide order-in-original No. 30/97 dated 19-12-1997 the Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed a demand of Rs. 39,53,517/- against M/s. Unique Enterprises, which is a proprietary concern of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -12-2005 the applications were rejected under sub-section (7) of Section 32F for non-cooperation by the applicants and the cases were sent back to the Tribunal for its disposal in accordance with the provisions of the Act, as if no application under Section 32E of the Act had been made. This order has been received by the applicants on 28-12-2005. The applicants have filed the above applications f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for restoration of an appeal which has been dismissed, there is no gainsaying the fact that the bench must be satisfied that the application for restoration being filed within a reasonable period. 4. Since the explanation given by the applicants is far from satisfactory we hold that these are appeals which are not fit for restoration and accordingly dismiss the ROA applications. (Dictated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
