75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

May 2015

[2015] 37 STR 976 (Mad.) Shri Shanmugar Service vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Madurai

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Mandar Telang Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Though order of pre-deposit is complied belatedly but for the reason not attributable to gross negligence of the appellant, the appeal may be restored.

Facts:
The appellant paid full pre-deposit belatedly because of fault of former advocate and complied with payment of pre-deposit order belatedly and approached the Tribunal for restoration of appeals. Relying on various judicial pronouncements, the Tribunal dismissed the application on the grounds that it did not have power to entertain appeal in absence of compliance of pre-deposit order. In order to observe substantial justice, the High Court considered the present appeal.

Held:
Hon’ble High Court observed that the reason for non-compliance of order was attributable to the fault of the former advocate and the appellant was pursuing matter diligently from adjudication stage. Therefore, in view of appellant’s bonafides, though order of pre-deposit was complied belatedly, the appeal was allowed and the original appeal was restored before Tribunal to decide the case on merits.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

[2015] 37 STR 970 (Guj.) Sanjayraj Hotels And Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India

2015-TIOL-739-HC-AP-ST] Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax vs. M/s Hyundai Motor India Engineering (P) Ltd.