TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal refuses appeal restoration, citing impermissible review of prior decision. Committee's consideration not persuasive.</h1> <h3>M/s BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI -II</h3> M/s BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI -II - TMI Issues:1. Restoration of appeal based on clearance from Committee on Dispute.2. Consideration of new facts for restoration of appeal.3. Permissibility of reviewing own order.Analysis:1. The applicants sought restoration of their appeal after it was initially dismissed due to lack of clearance from the Committee on Dispute. Despite approaching the Committee for reconsideration, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal with liberty to seek restoration upon obtaining clearance. Subsequently, an application for restoration was filed, which was later dismissed. Another application for restoration was submitted, currently pending.2. The contention raised was that the appeal should be restored as the application was under active consideration by the Committee on Dispute. Reference was made to a case where coercive steps towards recovery were instructed to be halted pending resolution. The argument emphasized that these crucial facts were not considered during the previous hearing for restoration of appeal.3. The Tribunal, upon hearing the submissions, noted that no new facts had emerged since the previous order. The facts presented now were already known to the Tribunal during the earlier dismissal of the restoration application. It was highlighted that reconsidering the application based on previously known facts would amount to reviewing the earlier order, which is impermissible in law. Consequently, the application for restoration of appeal was dismissed.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the application for restoration of appeal, emphasizing that reconsidering based on previously known facts would constitute a review of the earlier decision, which is legally prohibited.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
