2014 (8) TMI 908

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fend the Revenue and he is unable to appear before the CESTAT on 03.07.14 i.e. today, The said adjournment request is being strongly opposed by the ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant. 1.2 In this content, we would like to observe that the matter has been repeatedly coming up on record from dt. 21.10.13 to till date, and every time the counsel defending the appellants was flying from Mumbai, when the same was being repeatedly adjourned on one count or other. When it come before the Bench on 14.03.14 Revenue sought adjournment and the matter was adjourned on 25.04.14. Again on the said date the matter could not be taken up as the special counsel of the Revenue was not available. Accordingly the same was adjourn to 27.06.14. On the sa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nue and accordingly got the matter listed for 03.07.14. Sh. Goving Dixit never informed the Bench that the matter has to be defended by the special counsel Sh. A.K.Raha. 1.4 In view of the above, we do not appreciate the request made by the Revenue for further adjournment. We also note that in the adjournment letter, it is simply stated that Mr. A.K. Raha is unable to appear before the Tribunal, without giving any valid reason for his inability to cause appearance. At this stage ld. Joint CDR, Ms. Ranjana Jha appears and submits that the Revenue, inspite of all efforts made, is unable to get in touch with Sh. A.K. Raha and reiterates the request for adjournment. 1.5 The said request of adjournment is very strongly opposed by ld. Advoc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uent miscellaneous order passed on the modification application filed by the assessee, rejected the said application vide Misc. No. C/14/10 dt. 18.01.10 but extended the period to deposit. The said order was challenged by the appellant before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court who set aside the same and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the stay petition. Subsequently vide Misc. Order No. C/191/10 dt. 12.10.10, the Tribunal allowed the stay petition un-conditionally, thus not requiring the appellant to deposit any part of duty or penalty etc., imposed upon them. 4. We have gone through the said Misc. Order dt. 12.10.10 passed by the Tribunal allowing the stay petition unconditionally. We, however, note that....