9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as filed for waiving the condition of pre-deposit of interest and penalty, which was sine qua non for hearing of the appeal. The Tribunal vide order dated 15.2.2012 waived the condition of pre-deposit of interest and penalty. The respondent - Department moved a miscellaneous application No. E/446/12 clarifying that the appellant did not deposit the entire amount of duty and sought rectification of order dated 15.2.2012. The concerned Commissioner filed an affidavit in support of the application stating that the appellant had deposited only Rs. 58,28,711/- on 27.7.2011. On the date of hearing on 27.7.2012 before the Tribunal the appellant controverted the assertion made by the Revenue and the Tribunal directed the appellant to produce proof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken on board and the arguments have been heard. 7. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to show any justification for making a deliberate at tempt to mis-lead the Court for the purpose of acquiring interim relief. All that has been submitted by Mr. Sharma is that there was typographical error which created wrong impression in the mind of the Tribunal. However, such a stand taken by the appellant cannot be accepted, because in paras (a) (b) & (c) of the memorandum of appeal the appellant has claimed in categorical terms that the amount of duty demand had already been paid, then there is no question of any typographical mistake and the argument in that regard cannot be ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thus an extrinsic collateral act which vitiates all judicial acts, whether in rem or in personam.‟ 10. A perusal of the aforesaid principle of law would clearly bring out that the party mis-representing facts before the Court with the object of securing interim relief would be rendered disentitled to opportunity of hearing the matter on merit. Once the Tribunal has found that the interim order was secured by the appellant by practicing misrepresentation then no option is left with the Tribunal to non-suit the appellant on principle and precedent. It is established beyond doubt that such fraudulent misrepresentation has no place in the judicial administration. There is no substantial question of law within the meaning of Section 35 G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
