TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 723
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr S Renganathan For the Respondent : Mr B Vijay Karthikeyan JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. Sudhakar, J.) These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the aggrieved appellant, engaged in the business of manufacture of fireworks, falling under Chapter Heading No.3604.10 of First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, raising the following....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by order dated 19.01.2005, the Department's Appeals were dismissed, against which, the Department went in appeal to the Tribunal and the CESTAT, by final orders in Nos.586-590 of 2011, dated 10.05.2011, allowed the Department's Appeals on inclusion of 'Mahamai' charges. The Tribunal directed the authorities to quantify the duty based on 'cum duty price' concept. 4. The o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r adjournment was made on 18.10.2013 itself and it was sent through speed post, dated 19.10.2013, to CESTAT, making a request for adjournment to post the appeals during the third week of January 2014, which proof has been filed before this Court. 6. It transpires that there was no intimation about the next date of hearing and therefore, the appellant did not know about the date of hearing of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It is the further plea of the appellant that the entire issue should have been considered as one single component in all the 45 appeals as prejudice will be caused to the appellant by virtue of the impugned order, whereby all the remaining appeals will be dismissed, relying on the present order, which has been passed exparte. 9. We find that the Tribunal has passed the impugned order simply relyi....