https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187636 The Restoration Applications filed by the Appellant regarding an order passed without their representation were dismissed. The Bench determined that it lacked the authority to review its order as the Appeals were decided on merit, not due to non-prosecution. Despite arguments citing a case law and an address issue, the Bench found that the Appellant's absence during the previous order did not warrant restoration. The Appellant's responsibility to rectify the address with the Cestat Registry was emphasized, leading to the dismissal of the Restoration Applications. en-us Mon, 04 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Oct 2016 11:01:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187636 The Restoration Applications filed by the Appellant regarding an order passed without their representation were dismissed. The Bench determined that it lacked the authority to review its order as the Appeals were decided on merit, not due to non-prosecution. Despite arguments citing a case law and an address issue, the Bench found that the Appellant's absence during the previous order did not warrant restoration. The Appellant's responsibility to rectify the address with the Cestat Registry was emphasized, leading to the dismissal of the Restoration Applications. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 04 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187636