TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (6) TMI 759
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Application (ROA) No.545/2005 (CSM-163/2004). 2. By impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the application filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Central Excise) for recalling the order dated 23.09.2005 passed in Appeal No.CSM-163/04 by the Tribunal by which it had dismissed the Revenue's appeal on technical ground without going into the merits of case and while recalling the said order, has fixed the Revenue's appeal for hearing on merits. 3. So the short question, which arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether Tribunal was justified in allowing the application of the Revenue for recalling the order dated 23.9.2005. 4. Facts of the case are simple and short. 5. The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs had filed one ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....serves to be recalled by restoring the Revenue's appeal to its file for hearing on merits. The assessee being aggrieved, filed this writ petition questioning legality and correctness of this order. 8. Heard Mr. B Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R Dubey and Mr. DC Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondents. 9. Learned Counsel for the writ petitioner, while assailing the impugned order, contended that Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by the Revenue for recalling the order dated 23.09.05 by which the Revenue's appeal was dismissed because according to him, the appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal in appellant's presence through their representative. In other words, the submission was th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reasonably possible, in the light of that principle. The court is invested with the widest possible discretion to see that justice is done to all concerned. No hard and fast rule can be laid down; and the court in the exercise of its judicial discretion will have, in a given case, to determine what consequences are to follow from non-appearance. An order awarding costs, or an adjournment, or the consideration of the written statement and the framing of the issues on the spot, can in some cases meet the ends of justice. In other cases, more drastic action may be called for." 13. Applying the aforesaid principle of law to the facts of the case in letter and spirit, we are of the view that the argument of the learned counsel for the writ pet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proceeding to dismiss the appeal on such ground by ignoring its powers available under Rule 11(2) ibid. In all fairness, therefore, the Tribunal should have afforded an opportunity to the appellant (Revenue) to rectify the defects by taking recourse to the powers available to it under Rule 11(2) of the Rules by extending the time. It was not disputed that the Revenue did rectify the defect though after dismissal of appeal. The Tribunal, therefore, rightly entertained the application and restored the appeal for its hearing on merits. Such order could be passed by the Tribunal in its rectification jurisdiction because the order contained an error apparent on its face, it having been passed contrary to Rule 11(2) ibid. It may be mentioned tha....