2013 (12) TMI 822 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Dismissal, Requires Clearance for Appeal Restoration

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., VISAKHAPATNAM

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., VISAKHAPATNAM - 2013 (289) E.L.T. 59 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues:1. Requirement of clearance from the empowered Committee of Secretaries for appeal restoration.2. Interpretation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. case.3. Effect of the recall of judgments in ONGC case by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.Analysis:1. The appellant filed an application for restoration of appeal No. C/796/2007, which was dismissed for lack of clearance from the empowered Committee of Secretaries. The appellant argued that no such clearance was needed, citing the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. case. The Tribunal noted that the appellant's application before the Committee was not acted upon. However, the Tribunal held that the appellant was required to produce the clearance. The Tribunal distinguished a previous case where clearance was granted to another appellant, emphasizing that the delay in filing the restoration application was not satisfactorily explained. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument that the Supreme Court's recall of judgments in ONGC case had retrospective effect, maintaining that the dismissal order was valid until the date of the Supreme Court's judgment.2. The Tribunal analyzed the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. case and concluded that it did not invalidate previous orders requiring clearance from the Committee on Disputes for appeals. The Tribunal expressed concerns that a different interpretation could lead to unintended consequences and emphasized that the recall of judgments in ONGC case had prospective effect from the date of the Supreme Court's judgment. The Tribunal highlighted that the appellant had been pursuing clearance unsuccessfully for over three years, leading to the rejection of the restoration application.3. The Tribunal clarified that the recall of judgments in ONGC case had only prospective effect from a specific date. It emphasized that the appellant's pursuit of clearance from the Committee on Disputes for over three years did not alter the validity of the dismissal order. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument for restoration based on the retrospective effect of the Supreme Court's recall, maintaining the integrity of its previous order. The ROA application for restoration was ultimately rejected by the Tribunal.