9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g that the appellants have not been appearing for so many occasions - Held that: - from the very beginning the appellant has been negligent in pursuing his case before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has granted many opportunities to the applicant to appear and defend the case but when the appellant did not appear, the Tribunal decided the Stay Petition ex parte on 02.02.2016 and thereafter a miscel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise, Belgaum wherein the Commissioner has confirmed the demand to the tune of ₹ 2,68,38,623/- (Rupees Two Crores Sixty Eight Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Three only) in respect of the sponge iron valued at ₹ 16,44,52,340/- (Rupees Sixteen Crores Forty Four Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand Three Hundred and Forty only) and also demanded interest and penalty. He has further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ans taken from the Bank and the Financial Institution and the Financial Institution proceeded against the appellant company for recovery of the loans granted to them. Learned counsel has also placed on record various proceedings taken against the company by the financial institutions before the DRI. He further submitted that upon receipt of the Stay Order, the appellant-company immediately took up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16 decided the stay application in the absence of the appellant after recording that the appellants have not been appearing for so many occasions. The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit 50% of the duty confirmed against them and report compliance on 13.04.2016 and thereafter the appellant filed an application for setting aside the ex parte Stay Order but none appeared to argue the case on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the appellant has been negligent in pursuing his case before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has granted many opportunities to the applicant to appear and defend the case but when the appellant did not appear, the Tribunal decided the Stay Petition ex parte on 02.02.2016 and thereafter a miscellaneous application was filed for recalling the Stay Order and none appeared for defending the applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
