9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as pending before this court by the Tribunal even when its attention was brought to the fact inspite of that the appeal was dismissed. We are aware that it is open to the Tribunal to dismiss an appeal for non-compliance. We are also aware of the fact that it is open to the Tribunal in the absence of pre-deposit by the stipulated date to dismiss the appeal. However, when a party brings to the notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order dated 14 May 2013. At that time he pointed out to CESTAT that the appellant has challenged the order dated 14 May 2013 before this Court and though originally listed on 2 July 2013, the appeal had been placed by this Court for hearing on 3 July 2013. Therefore, Advocate Mr. Kulkarni prayed that the Appeal of the appellant which was on board to report compliance with pre-deposit order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited the result of the hearing of appeal before this Court which was fixed on 3 July, 2013 itself. An adjournment by a couple of days in the above circumstances would have been in the interests of justice besides avoiding multiplicity of proceedings. 4. We regret to state that it appears that this is not the first time such a situation has arisen. In Jai Prakash Strips Ltd. v. Union of India ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er from this court, and on failure to do so proceed with the matter. Ultimately, the Tribunal is subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of this court. 7. Considering the above facts, the order of dismissal of appeal is set aside. The order of pre-deposit is varied to the extent that the amount already deposited would be considered as pre-deposit. The Tribunal is directed to hear the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
