https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116000 An appeal dismissed for want of service of hearing notice on the respondent could not be restored merely because notice was later served on the Official Liquidator. The tribunal found that, before dismissal, it had not been informed that the respondent-company was in liquidation, and Rule 22 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules was not satisfied by the subsequent service. Later service therefore did not cure the earlier defect or justify reopening the dismissed appeal. The restoration application was rejected. en-us Thu, 21 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:44:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116000 An appeal dismissed for want of service of hearing notice on the respondent could not be restored merely because notice was later served on the Official Liquidator. The tribunal found that, before dismissal, it had not been informed that the respondent-company was in liquidation, and Rule 22 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules was not satisfied by the subsequent service. Later service therefore did not cure the earlier defect or justify reopening the dismissed appeal. The restoration application was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116000