9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide Final Order No. 284/2003- NB(C), dated 29-5-2003, the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of order dated 16-1-2003. The applicants thereafter filed three applications for restoring the appeal to its original number but all applications were rejected. The applicants were filing the applications without complying with the stay order dated 16-1-2003. Since the appeal was dismissed for non-com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applicants against the Order-in- Original No. 27/Comm/MI/2002, dated 3-9-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-I in which duty of Rs. 5,46,47,223/- was demanded and a penalty of Rs. 1 crore was imposed on the applicant. The stay application filed by the applicants against the order of Commissioner was decided under Stay Order No. S/58 of 2003 NB(DB), dated 16-1-2003 wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or restoration of the appeal on 24-7-2003. They again filed an application for restoration of the appeal on 14th September, 2005 without depositing any amount which was dismissed under Misc. Order No. 212/2006, dated 9-3-2006. The present Misc. application for restoration of appeal dated 27-4-2006 does not show that they have deposited any amount. On the contrary, they said that the factory has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
