9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.S., Member (Judicial) and Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri CA. Diwakar, Advocate for the Appellant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The above appeal was listed for hearing on 17.7.2017 and was adjourned to this day on request by the counsel for the appellant. The matter has been remanded by the Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated 11.9.2014. 2. In this appeal, originally a docket order was passed on 3.6.2009 whereby the Tribunal had partly allowed the appeal by reducing the penalty imposed from ₹ 8 lakhs to ₹ 2 lakhs. There was no detailed order issued to parties and the case was relisted for hearing for reasons which will be explained later. After rehearing, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esh Malhotra ₹ 3 lakhs (iii) Haren Choksey ₹ 2 lakhs (appellant herein) b. On the same day, it is seen that the file was entrusted to Member (Technical) for drafting orders. Later, on 31.8.2009, the Member (Technical) has addressed to Member (Judicial) requesting for rehearing the matter. A copy of this letter is seen issued to Hon'ble President of CESTAT, New Delhi, Member (Technical), CESTAT, Chennai and Assistant Registrar, CESTAT, Chennai. c. On 7.9.2009, the Deputy Registrar, Chennai has addressed to Registrar, CESTAT, New Delhi in regard to the above request of Member and seeking approval of Hon'ble President for rehearing the case. d. On 22.9.2009, the Registrar, CES ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the first docket order is not supported by any reasons and therefore is withdrawn. 6. Having concluded that the first docket order is not supported by reasons and withdrawn, and the Hon'ble High Court having set aside the second order, in our view, we have to rehear the appeal on merits. The case presents a peculiar situation which needs to be resolved to give finality to the litigation. We therefore are of the considered opinion that the appeal filed by appellant Shri Haren Choksey having been remanded, has to be heard on merits. 7. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant states that he is not ready with the matter to argue on merits and requested time. The case is thus adjourned to 27.7.2017 for hearing on mer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
