ROA filed after 16 years - request for restoration is to be filed within 3 months from dismissal of appeal - ROA application dismissed
IN July, 1987, the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda had passed an o-in-o and against this order the appellant assessee had filed an appeal before the CESTAT in the same year. After almost ten years the appeal was dismissed by the CESTAT for non-prosecution.
Then there was an eerie silence and at the dawn of this year, the appellant filed an application for Restoration of the appeal.
When the matter came before the Bench, the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has no power to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution and the appeal should have been decided on merits.
The Revenue representative submitted that it is too late in the day for filing a ROA; that this sixteen year delay is unjustified and the application is not maintainable. Reliance is placed on the decision in Kirtikumar Jawaharlal Shah vs. UOI () and the Tribunal decision () to submit that request for restoration is to be made within three months from the dismissal of the appeal.
The Bench observed -
"6. We find that the present application is filed after almost 16 years from the order of dismissal. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kirtikumar Jawaharlal Shah vs. Union of India supra held that though there is no period of limitation prescribed for filing an application for setting aside the order of dismissal, the Tribunal was justified in holding that in any case since the application was filed beyond the period of three months from the date of dismissal of appeal. In view of the above, the application for restoration of the appeal is dismissed.”
Hopefully, the Revenue must have made the recovery of the adjudged dues long back or is this ROA a ‘cosmetic' offshoot of the proceedings initiated in terms of Circular 967.