Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 153 - AT - Central ExciseValidity of impugned order - Exparte order - Held that:- appellant's factory is closed since November, 2004. The appeal by the appellant company and its Directors, against the impugned order were filed in November, 2005. When the factory was closed since November, 2004, we fail to understand as to why in the column in Memorandum of appeal for the "address for communication", it is the address of the factory which was given and not any other address where the appellant company had its office. It is also seen that in the memorandum of appeal, in addition to the factory address, the address of the appellant's Counsel "V.Laxmi Kumaran, Advocate, B-6/10, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029" had also been given - Though the appellants Counsel withdrew his appearance sometime in January, 2014, thus, since, January, 2014, other than the factory address of the appellant which was closed there was no address to which any directions to them regarding date of hearing could be communicated, if the appellant were really serious in pursuing the appeal they should have given the same other address for communication at which they would be available and not the address of the factory which was closed since one year prior to filing of the appeal - ppellant has not cooperated at all with the Tribunal in this regard. We, therefore, are not convinced with the reasons given by the appellant for restoration of the appeal - Decided against assessee.
|