Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S Markfed Hdpe Sacks Plant Vs. C.C.E., vs Ludhiana on 6 February, 2009

        

 
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
West Block No.2, R.K.Puram, New Delhi

COURT-III

 Date of hearing/decision:6.2.2009
   
Restoration Application No.776 of 2008 in
Central Excise Appeal No.2337 of 2004

Arising out of the Final Order No.70/07-Ex. dated 25.1.2007 passed by  CESTAT, New Delhi.


Appellant 				                  		                    Respondent
M/s Markfed HDPE Sacks Plant			vs.				C.C.E.,
											     Ludhiana						 
		 
Appearance:

Shri Akash Tyagi, Advocate for the appellant 
Shri  C.S. Rajput,  Authorized Departmental Representative (DR) for the Revenue  
 
Coram:    Honble Mr. M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical)
		      Honble Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial)
		 
			Order No.____________________	

Per  P.K. Das:

The applicant filed this application for recalling of the ex-parte Final Order No. 70/07-Ex. dated 25.1.2007.

2. Learned Advocate submits that due to negligency and inaction on the part of the Counsel the order was passed ex-parte. In this connection, he drew attention of the Bench to paragraph 2 of the application which is reproduced below:

2. That it is very humbly submitted on behalf of the applicant/appellant that due to non cooperation and callous approach of the previous counsel who failed to represent the applicant/appellant in present appeal as he never bothered to contest the case nor he never intimate the next date of hearing as fixed by this Honble Tribunal to the applicant/appellant. As the result of the aforesaid none appeared on behalf of the appellant before this Honble Tribunal and this Honble Tribunal was pleased to pass the ex-parte order dated 25.1.2007 vide which this Honble Tribunal was pleased to dismiss the present appeal filed by the applicant/appellant. It is pertinent to mention here that thereafter, the previous counsel even failed to intimate about the aforesaid order to the applicant/appellant and moreover he even did not file the present application for setting aside the ex-parte order dated 25.1.2007 and restoration of the present appeal to its original number, hence the applicant/appellant due to the above said reasons was not be able to contest this appeal and also could not file the present application for setting aside the ex parte order dated 25.1.2007 and restoration of the above said appeal in time.
3. We find that on the identical situation, the applicant filed application for condonation of delay of 800 days against the other appeal which was condoned by the Tribunal vide order dated 28th March, 2008.
4. Learned Advocate relied upon the decision Honble Supreme Court in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. vs. C.C.E.  1996 (86) ELT 472 (SC) wherein it has been held that ex-parte dismissal of appeal on merits can be restorable when there was sufficient cause for absence of a party.
5. After hearing both sides, we find that ex-parte order was passed due negligency on the part of the learned Counsel. It is settled that litigants should not suffer for the negligency of the counsel. In view of that we recall the Final Order No. 70/07-Ex. dated 25.1.2007. The appeal is fixed for hearing on 26.3.2009.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court) (M. Veeraiyan) Member (Technical) (P.K. Das) Member (Judicial) scd/