Appeal Dismissed for Non-Appearance and Monetary Limit Exceeded

The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI due to the appellant's continuous non-appearance for the hearing, despite prior adjournment requests. The appellant's lack of interest in prosecuting the matter was evident. Moreover, the case involved an amount below the monetary limit set by Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed based on non-prosecution and exceeding the monetary limit, with the order finalizing the dismissal pronounced in open court.

---

---

Issues: Non-appearance of appellant for hearing, continuous absence leading to dismissal, monetary limit under Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944

In the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, the appeal was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the appellant for the hearing despite notices being issued. The appellant and counsel had previously requested adjournments on multiple dates, indicating a lack of interest in prosecuting the matter. The continuous absence of the appellant and counsel led to the presumption that they were not interested in pursuing the appeal. Additionally, the amount involved in the case was only &8377; 76,000, falling within the monetary limits specified under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of non-prosecution and also due to the monetary limit being exceeded. The operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court, finalizing the dismissal of the appeal.

---