2006 (5) TMI 372 - AT - Central Excise

Revival of Appeals under Central Excise Act: Procedural Significance of Section 32PA(7)

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai held that appeals under Section 32PA(7) of the Central Excise Act were automatically revived after the Settlement ... Appeal to Appellate Tribunal Issues: Revival of appeals under Section 32PA(7) of the Central Excise Act due to rejection of applications by the Settlement Commission.In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, the issue at hand involved the revival of appeals under Section 32PA(7) of the Central Excise Act following the rejection of applications by the Settlement Commission. The Tribunal initially disposed of certain appeals permitting their withdrawal as the appellants sought relief from the Settlement Commission. However, the Settlement Commission later held that the applications cannot proceed further due to Revenue's appeal against the impugned order. Subsequently, the applicants mistakenly believed that all appeals were withdrawn, leading to a request for restoration of appeals. Upon hearing both sides and considering the statutory provisions, the Tribunal found that the appeals were deemed to have been revived under Section 32PA(7) of the Act, as correctly argued by the advocate. Therefore, no further orders were necessary as the appeals stood revived. The restored appeals, along with other pending appeals, were scheduled for regular hearing.The judgment highlighted the significance of Section 32PA(7) of the Central Excise Act in automatically reviving appeals when applications before the Settlement Commission are rejected. The Tribunal acknowledged the correctness of the advocate's submission regarding the revival of appeals under this provision. It was emphasized that the revival of appeals was a statutory consequence, and no additional orders were required in such cases. The Tribunal's decision to schedule the restored appeals and other pending appeals for regular hearing further underscored the procedural aspect of addressing matters following the revival of appeals under Section 32PA(7). The judgment served as a clear interpretation and application of the relevant statutory provisions to ensure the proper handling of appeals in light of actions taken by the Settlement Commission and the subsequent revival of appeals.