9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal has been filed beyond the period of three months - Held that:- Though the order of the Tribunal was pronounced in open court on 28.07.2017, the same was dispatched from the Registry on 02.08.2017 and the applicant being a resident of Ichalkaranji in Kolhapur District, may have received the said order after 5 days; on this presumption, the application for ROA filed by the applicant on 09.11.2017 cannot be considered as time barred. The final order dated 28.07.2017 of the Tribunal is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number with direction to the Registry to list the appeal for final disposal in due course - application allowed. - Application No. E/ROA/92975/17 Appeal No. E/26/09 - M/85447/2018 - Dated:- 25-4-2018 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merits. 6. On careful consideration of the submission made by both sides, I find that the appeal No.E/26/2009 is filed by Revenue against order-in-appeal No. PII/PAP/182/2008 dated 22.09.2008, wherein the first appellate authority has set aside the order-in-original which was challenged. 7. When the matter was called out and arguments were advanced on behalf of the applicant, the bench asked a specific query as to whether the applicant had sufficient cause to seek restoration of appeal, which was disposed of by the bench on merits. 7.1 Learned Consultant would submit that the specific point has been settled by the hon'ble apex court in the case of J.K. Synthetic Ltd. V. CCE - 1996 (86) ELT 472 (SC) and draws my attention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Apex Court in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. had stated that if the respondent established to the satisfaction of the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance before the bench, Tribunal may set aside the order and restore the appeal to its original number and hear it afresh on merits. It is seen from the correspondence annexed to the application for restoration of appeal. I do find that the applicant had informed the Registry about the adjournment of the hearing of 27.04.2017 wherein the residential address is mentioned clearly. It seems that the Registry has not considered this address and the hearing notice for 29.05.2017 was dispatched to the old address as provided by Revenue in their appeal. I am convinced that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
