9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 876X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thout any serious reason, backed with proof, for the non-appearance of the Appellant or his authorised representative on the dates of public hearing. Thus, no purpose would be served in continuing with this appeal and hence reject the same for default as per Rule 20 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. - HON BLE SHRI M. AJIT KUMAR , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) None for the Appellant Shri Sanjay Kakkar , Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER This appeal is against Order in Appeal No. passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of Zinc Sulphate and Magnesium Sulphate falling under Tariff 28332990 and 28332100 re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the principles of natural justice was not followed by the Original Authority since they were given consecutive dates of personal hearing which is not admissible by law and vide the order impugned in the present appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order in Original. Hence this appeal before this Tribunal one of the grounds of which was that the Original Authority had passed the order without following the principles of natural justice. 3. When the matter came up for hearing on 4.11.2024, it was observed that there was no one to represent the appellant. It is seen from case proceedings that this appeal pertains to the year 2014 and has come up for hearing on seven earlier occasions. Except for one hearing i.e. for 3.4.2024, appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring, so that the issues including that of admissibility can be examined. The daily Cause List showing the cases being listed for hearing is available in the public domain on the Tribunal s website. After filing an appeal, due diligence mandates that the Appellant follow up on the matter and make himself available on the date of hearing either in person or by his Authorized representative. Persons with good causes of action should pursue the remedy with reasonable diligence at every available opportunity. Hence there is reasonable ground to think that the non-appearance was occasioned by the Appellant not being serious about the appeal and is deliberately trying to gain time. It is a well-accepted position that the accrued right of the opp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the Tribunal in the case of Pankaj Vs. CCE (supra) which has heavily relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ishwarlal Mali Rathod vs Gopal in SLP (Civil) Nos. 14117 14118/2021; Babu Singh Vs. State of UP (1978) 1 SCC 579; Shiv Cotex Vs. Tirgun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. (2011) 9 SCC 678; Noor Mohammed Vs. Jethanand Anr. (213) 5 SCC 202, etc and has concluded that there is no justification for adjourning the matter beyond three times which is the maximum number statutorily provided. The extract from the judgment of Shiv Cotex (supra), is succinct and worth reproducing. It was held as under:- 14. Is the court obliged to give adjournment after adjournment merely because the stakes are high in the dispute? Should t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the effective work on the date of hearing for which the matter has been fixed. If they don't, they do so at their own peril. 8. I find that the a Division Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Benny D'Souza Ors vs Melwin D'Souza Ors [CIVIL APPEAL NO. /2023 @ SLP (C) No.23809/2023, dated: 24/11/2023 / 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1032], heard an appeal wherein the major contention of the appellant was that the High Court should have dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in terms of the order XLI Rule 17 CPC and particularly the Explanation thereto instead of dismissing the appeal on merits. The Hon ble Court after extracting Order XLI Rule 17 of the CPC, which reads as under: 17. Dismissal of appeal for appellant s default :- (1) Wher ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and restore the appeal. I also note that the Rule provides that if the appellant appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing can set aside the dismissal and restore the appeal. 10. Considering the statutory position and the views expressed by the Hon ble Apex Court in the various judgments cited above, adjournments can t be given for the mere asking without any serious reason, backed with proof, for the non-appearance of the Appellant or his authorised representative on the dates of public hearing. I find that no purpose would be served in continuing with this appeal and hence reject the same for default as per Rule 20 of CESTAT (Procedure) Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
