9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - R. Periasami, Member (T),J. For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Mr K P Muralidharan, AC (AR) ORDER Per: R Periasami: Appellant filed this appeal against OIA dt.1.9.2006 passed by Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal has been listed on several occasions viz. on 7.9.2012, 4.10.2013, 7.2.2014, 9.5.2014 and 19.3.2015, but the appellant repeatedly failed to appear before the Bench nor they have submitted any document or adjournment application. The appeal being very old, and also appellant is not pursuing the appeal, therefore appeal is taken up for disposal on merits based on the documents available on record. 2. The issue relates to refund claim filed on excise duty paid on scented suprari and the claim wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. 4. I have perused the records. The appeal was listed for hearing several times but none appeared and the appellant failed to respond to the notices issued by Registry. The appellant is not interested in pursuing their appeal and on this ground alone the appeal is liable for dismissal for want of prosecution. 5. On merits of the appeal, I find that appellant filed CMA before Hon'ble High Court, Madras and obtained an interim stay against Tribunal's Final Order No.1058/2005 dt. 29.7.2005. The appeal was kept pending as the CMA was not disposed by the Hon'ble High Court. Thereafter, this Bench vide note order dt. 9.5.2014 and 19.3.2015 directed both sides to ascertain the status of the CMA pending before the High Court. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cturer, the date of purchase of goods by such person. Thus, the definition of relevant date clearly states against the case of the appellant and as rightly held by the Tribunal, the claim for refund is only barred by limitation. Accordingly, no ground is made out to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous appeal fails and is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected CMP is also dismissed. 5. The present appeal is an offshoot of refund claim which was originally rejected by the adjudicating authority in his order dt. 30.5.2001 on limitation which is upheld by Tribunal in Final order dt.29.7.2005 and Hon'ble High Court. By respectfully following the order of Hon'ble High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
