9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Shri S.K. Mall, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order].- Vide Order No. S/408 to 412/WZB/05-C-IV, dated 5-7-2005 [2006 (205) E.L.T. 177 (Tri. - Mumbai)], the appellants were directed to deposit entire amount of duty demanded and the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance with the requirement of pre-deposit vide Order No. A/1410-1414/WZB/05/C-V/SMB, dated 5-10-2005. Subsequently, the appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may be restored without insisting on deposit of balance dues. 3. I have considered the submissions made by the ld. Consultant. I find that the ld. Consultant is arguing the case on merit. However, ld. SDR submitted that in the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kiritkumar J. Shah v. C.C.E., Nagpur - 2009 (242) E.L.T. 222 (Tri.-Mum.), it has been held that in the absence of any specific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red without considering the plea of ld. SDR about delay in filing the application. It is quite clear from the above discussion that the decision of the Tribunal cited by ld. SDR ibid is against the appellants and I am bound to follow the decision. 4. After considering the submissions and in view of precedent Tribunal decisions, the application filed with such a delay for restoration of appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
