Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
Anglo-French Textiles vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 15 March, 2004
ORDER S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. In this matter Ms. Meenakshi, Advocate seeks for adjournment of the appeal as a last and final chance. It is seen from the order that this matter has been adjourned from 13.02.02 till date and on every date of hearing the Counsel has been seeking adjournment as a last chance. On 03.07.02., the bench had indicated that the mater is adjourned as a last chance. Again, similar requests for adjournment were made on two other occasions. It was adjourned on 28.03.2002. 17.06.02, 03.07.02 and 30.07.02. It was made clear that the matter had been adjourned as a last chance. On 14.08.2002, the counsel submitted that Shri Krishna Srinivas, Advocate was unwell and on that account adjournment was taken. On 23.08.02, adjournment was sought on the ground of lawyers boycott. On 01.10.02, it was again adjourned finally on 11.12.02. On 11.12.2002, the counsel sought adjournment again on the ground that Shri Krishna Srinivas is held up in the High Court. The matter was adjourned to 28.02.2003. On 28.02.03, the Counsel sought adjournment again on the ground that her Senior Counsel is on his legs before High Court. However, it was recorded by the Bench in the order sheet we do not appreciate the conduct of the appellant seeking repeated adjournment on this ground Reluctantly and by way of last chance, we adjourn the matter to 02.06.03. On 02.06.03, the Counsel made a similar submission and it was adjourned finally to 29.09.03. On 29.09.03, similar request was made by the Counsel and the matter was adjourned to 05.11.03. On 05.11.03, the matter was adjourned finally for hearing on 20.01.04. On 20.01.04, the matter was adjourned to 21.01.04. On 21.01.04, the Counsel again asked for adjournment and it was again adjourned as last and final chance. It was recorded in the order note that 'no more adjournment would be granted on next date'. It was adjourned to 18.02.04. On 18.02.2004, there was no Bench sitting and the matter was again to come up for hearing on 15.03.04. We notice from the order sheet that appellants have been given umber of opportunities in the matter to argue their case. The confirmed amount in the appeal is Rs. 80,65,514/- with the penalty amount of Rs.8 lakhs and confirmation of interest on the same amount. The appellants have not filed neither paper book nor they have taken interest to pursue the matter.
2. In these circumstances, the Ld. JDR Shri a. Jayachandran opposes the prayer of the Counsel. He submits that no more leniency has to be given in the matter and the matter is required to be dismissed for non-prosecution and non-production of paper book in terms of Rule 11 of CEGAT Procedure Rules.
3. We are agreeable with the submissions made by the Ld. JDR Shri A. Jayachandran that in this matter, the appellants have been given several opportunities to argue the matter and they have not taken any steps to file the paper book or to argue the matter. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed under Rule 11 of CEGAT Procedure Rules for non-prosecution.