STAY APPLICATION - CESTAT

[Shrikant Gaonker]

ONE company had deposited the amount ordered by CESTAT Bench within the given time against their stay application and submitted the challan alongwith letter intimating the compliance of the Bench order ten days before the stipulated period. On 25.10.10 matter came before the BENCH and as appellant had not appeared in person { but had submitted the compliance report to the Registry }, the BEnch ruled that no evidence is produced regardindg deposit and non appeared for appellants. Appeal dismissed. Kindly let us know, whether the action of CESTAT to dismiss the stay appln & appeal is correct & what is the remedy to restore it.

AI Summary

Company's Appeal Dismissed for Non-Appearance Despite Compliance; Possible Restoration Under CESTAT Rule 20 Discussed A company complied with a CESTAT Bench order by depositing the required amount and submitting proof before the deadline. However, the appeal was dismissed because the appellant did not appear in person, despite submitting compliance documentation. The forum discusses whether CESTAT's dismissal was appropriate and potential remedies. One participant refers to CESTAT Rule 20, which allows for appeal dismissal if the appellant is absent, but also permits restoration if a valid reason for absence is provided. Another suggests filing an application to restore the appeal.