Restoration under Rule 20 unavailable where appeal was dismissed after hearing for non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements.

Restoration under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Rules is confined to dismissals for default arising from the appellant's non-appearance, and it cannot be invoked to reopen an appeal dismissed after hearing for failure to comply with the statutory pre-deposit requirement. Because the appellant had appeared through counsel and the dismissal was not for absence, the recall application was outside Rule 20. The Tribunal also treated the request as untenable due to inordinate, unexplained delay, including the appellant's prior pursuit of the same issue before higher courts. The restoration and recall request was therefore declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal dismissed for non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit requirement could be restored under Rule 20 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1982, and whether the recall application filed after an inordinate delay was maintainable.

Analysis: Rule 20 permits restoration only where the appeal is dismissed for default because the appellant does not appear when the matter is called on for hearing, and the appellant later satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for such non-appearance. Here, the appellant had appeared through counsel and made submissions, and the appeal was dismissed because the statutory pre-deposit requirement was not complied with. That situation does not fall within Rule 20. The application was also filed after an enormous delay, without any satisfactory explanation, and the record showed that the appellant had already pursued the matter before the High Court and the Supreme Court on the same issue before seeking recall.

Conclusion: The restoration application was not maintainable and the belated request for recall was rightly declined.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal refused to reopen the earlier dismissal of the appeal, holding that the restoration rule did not apply and that the application was barred by unexplained delay.

Ratio Decidendi: Restoration under Rule 20 is confined to dismissals for default caused by the appellant's non-appearance, and it cannot be used to revive an appeal dismissed after hearing for failure to satisfy a statutory pre-deposit condition, especially where the recall request is filed after inordinate and unexplained delay.

---