9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts had filed the Appeal before the lower Appellate Authority after a delay of about 9 months and hence, the said authority had correctly dismissed the Appeal before him as he had no power to condone the delay beyond the condonable time-limit. The Appellants subsequently filed a Miscellaneous Application for restoration of the Appeal which was dismissed on 11-6-2008 [2008 (230) E.L.T. 329 (Tri. - Kol.)] following the ratio of the decision of the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Rajesh Kumar Jain v. Union of India - 1999 (113) E.L.T. 57 (Cal.). While passing this Order, the Tribunal followed the Larger Bench decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta having jurisdiction over this Bench of the Tribunal in p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 11-6-2008 in not following the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Margra Industries (supra). Shri Chowdhury, learned Advocate also contended that through the present Miscellaneous Application which has been filed pursuant to the direction of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, the Appellants are seeking a rectification of the earlier Order dated 11-6-2008 of the Tribunal and if the Tribunal does not agree with the decision in Margra Industries (supra), it should refer the matter to a Larger Bench. He also prays for restoration of the Appeal filed by the Appellants and for holding that the Appeal of the Appellants was filed within the prescribed time-limit before the lower Appellate Authority. 3. Shri J.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd other cases cited by the Tribunal in the Order dated 11-6-2008, the Tribunal was required to refer the matter to a Larger Bench of the Tribunal rather than following the decision of the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court. In response to another query, he states that the Tribunal being a court has power to rectify any mistake committed by it, specially in this case, when an application for such rectification has been filed following liberty given by the Hon'ble High Court. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions from both sides as well as the ratio of the cited case-laws. We find that in this case, the Appeal of the Appellants was rejected by a Final Order dated 28-3-2007. Subsequently, the Miscellaneous Applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in preference to the decision of the Tribunal's Larger Bench. In our considered view, judicial discipline requires that a Bench of the Tribunal should follow the ratio of the decision of a Superior Court in preference to the decision of a lower Court or Tribunal and therefore, in our view, the Order passed by the Tribunal on 11-6-2008 is correct and legal. Our view in this regard finds support in the Division Bench decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CCE v. Medico Labs. - 2004 (173) E.L.T. 117 (Guj.) which considered a similar question as to whether a decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal can be ignored when a contrary view is taken by a Higher Court. Moreover, even if we were to take a different view fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
