9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 1112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NICAL) Appearance: Mr. B.L. Narsimhan (Advocate) for the Appellant Mrs. Neha Garg (DR) for the Respondent Per R.K. Singh: The appellant has filed the restoration of appeal application seeking recall of the CESTAT order dated 28.08.2006 on the ground that the COD application was available on the date of dismissal of its appeal but was not brought to the notice of CESTAT, and that it has now be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s too long to condone, even if there is no time limit prescribed for seeking restoration of appeal. 3. We have considered the contentions of both sides. 4. The CESTAT order dated 28.08.2006 sought to be recalled by the appellant is reproduced below: "The appellant is a Public Sector Undertaking and governed by the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ONGC vs CE, Calcutta rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appeal cannot be ordered to be restored except for the penalty aspect. As regards the contention of the Ld. D.R. that unacceptably long time has elapsed since the appeal was dismissed, we may observe that CESTAT in its order dated 28.08.2006 did not set any time limit to seek restoration of appeal on production of COD clearance. In the case of HPCL vs CCE Lucknow (supra) CESTAT has an occ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessary clearance from the COD and, by necessary implication, only to the extent it has been cleared by the COD. 5. In the light of foregoing analysis, we allow the restoration of appeal only in relation to penalty. The Registry to list the appeal in due course. 6. As regards the stay application, we find that the entire amount of duty stands deposited and appropriated vide the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
