New classification plea cannot be raised for the first time in appeal; restoration allowed after missing orders were produced.

An appeal dismissed for non-production of the impugned adjudication and appellate orders was restored once the missing documents were produced, because the procedural defect preventing merits review had been cured. However, a fresh classification claim based on a tariff heading not advanced before the lower authorities was not entertained. The governing principle is that a party cannot introduce a new factual or classification case for the first time in appeal; classification must be determined on the basis of the case made out below. The restoration succeeded, but the new classification ground failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appeal warranted restoration after production of the missing adjudication and appellate orders. (ii) Whether the appellant could seek classification under a new tariff heading not canvassed before the authorities below.

Issue (i): Whether the appeal warranted restoration after production of the missing adjudication and appellate orders.

Analysis: The appeal had earlier been dismissed for non-production of the impugned orders and connected documents required for adjudication. Once those documents were produced, the defect which had prevented consideration on merits stood cured, and restoration was considered appropriate.

Conclusion: The appeal was restored.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant could seek classification under a new tariff heading not canvassed before the authorities below.

Analysis: The relief sought in appeal attempted to introduce a different classification heading from that urged before the lower authorities. The applicable principle is that a party cannot be permitted to set up a new case for the first time in appeal, since the factual foundation must be laid before the authorities below. Classification must be examined on the basis of the case made out before those authorities.

Conclusion: The new classification plea was not entertained.

Final Conclusion: The restoration request succeeded, but the revenue appeal failed on merits because the proposed new classification ground could not be raised for the first time in appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: A new factual or classification case cannot be introduced for the first time in appeal; the appellate forum will not permit a party to seek determination on a basis not placed before the lower authorities.

---