9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1064X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l was heard on 8-3-2011, the respondent remained absent. Even today when the Miscellaneous Application No. (ROM)18/2011 (praying for Rectification of Mistake apparent from record) was called, neither the respondent nor its authorised representative is present. At the stage of appeal hearing, there was no cross objection before us from the Respondent to wait for another occasion. Therefore, Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent that had the submissions been considered order would have been passed in favour of the respondent. But to explain its case even today, the respondent has remained absent. Absence of respondent repeatedly shows that this application is an abuse of process of law. Even then we looked into the merits of the application for our consideration. When we looked to the order passed by us on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examined the records thoroughly. We found that the appellate authority attributing fault of the Chartered Accountant without any evidence on record allowed relief to the Respondent. The reason given by adjudicating authority as depicted in para 4 of the appeal order appealed to us for a decision in favour of Revenue. Also when we found that the Respondent had no merit to explain, appeal of Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
