2014 (5) TMI 1049

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ain, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER When the stay application was heard on 10-4-2012 even though appellant was absent, considering that the matter of the appellant was covered by the decision of Tribunal in the case of Madhav Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. CCE, Indore-I reported in 2012-TIOL-234-CESTAT-DEL = 2012 (27) S.T.R. 352 (Tribunal), it was prima facie opined that appeals of the appellant we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oration application disposed on 26-11-2012. Even today appellant is absent. Casual approach of the appellant as above shows scanty regard to law. Repeated default to cause appearance clearly shows that appellant is only abusing process of law causing prejudice to the interest of Revenue. 4. While passing stay order dated 10-4-2012, bench has appreciated that the case of the appellant is cove .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... law. 5. Registry should record that if further miscellaneous application comes up in these appeals, it should be specifically mentioned in the cause list that there were two occasions of dismissal of restoration applications. 6. We may state that abuse of process of law has not been entertained by Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case of Uniworth Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur - 201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X