TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 952
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellant. JUDGMENT D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J. - This appeal under section 35G[2] of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [for short 'the Act'] read with section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, is directed against the order dated 15.11.2010 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [for short Tribunal] and a further order dated 8.4.2011 passed by the Tribunal on an application ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enalty of like sum in addition to penalty under sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 4. Appearing on behalf of the appellant, submission of Sri. Cherian, learned counsel is that the Tribunal has committed an error in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution; that the Tribunal is bound to consider the appeal preferred under the provisions of section 35C of the Act on its merits and pass o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der dismissing the appeal is only as a sequel to dismissing the application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal and the appellant though had filed application seeking for condonation, that application was not prosecuted with diligence and therefore the Tribunal was left with no choice but to dismiss the application for condonation of delay and as a consequence dismissed the appeal an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isfied that the case involves substantial question of law. 9. In the present appeal, we find that the appeal of the appellant before the Tribunal has been dismissed though without going into the merits of the appeal, but not directly because of non-prosecution of the appeal, but as a sequel to the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay. 10. In such circumstances, we are afraid the....