TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 23
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the impugned order, the application filed by the appellant for restoration of the appeal filed by the appellant, which was dismissed for default vide final order dated 02.8.2017, was dismissed. 2. The above appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law : "Whether the impugned order of the Tribunal is bad in law for departing from the following principles : (i) by virtue of Article 141 of The Constitution of India, the issue must be decided strictly in accordance with law laid down by the Supreme Court - it being the last word on the subject ? And (ii) if, there is no decision of the Supreme Court on the issue, then the effort must be to decide the issue by any decision of the High Court of our country, if holding ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ays. Thus, the Tribunal, in the said order dated 22.3.2017, ordered notice to the Official Liquidator to inform the Tribunal as to whether he chooses to be necessary respondent in the appeals and if he chooses to do so, he may file an appropriate application. 5. When the cases came up for hearing before the Tribunal on 02.8.2017, it appears that both the Official Liquidator as well as the appellant herein were not represented by counsel. It is submitted that on account of unavoidable circumstances and due to ill-health, the appellant herein could not travel to Chennai from Coimbatore and that therefore, he could not appear. Consequently, the appeals filed by both the company as well as the appellant herein were dismissed on account of defa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of JK Synthetics Limited Vs. Collector [reported in (1996) 86 ELT 472], which was relied upon by the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Fairdeal Supplies Limited Vs. CC [reported in (2017) 351 ELT 220]. 8. The aforementioned decisions, which were referred to in the application for restoration, were furnished in the form of a paper book before the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal, by the impugned order, held that if the appellant herein was interested in prosecuting the matter, he ought to have appeared and argued the matter and that till the dismissal of the appeal, there was no representation for either the Official Liquidator or the co-noticee (appellant herein). Thus, the Tribunal c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich enables the Tribunal to dismiss the appeal for default of appearance, as being ultra vires the provisions of Section 35C(1) of the Act and Section 129B(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court held that having regard to the scheme of the Act as well as the Customs Act, 1962, there was no manner of doubt that the appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal has got to be disposed of on merits and not for default of appearance of the appellant, that the Appellate Tribunal has to decide the issue ex parte, that dismissing the appeal for non appearance does not seem to be legally or even, on equity of grounds, correct when the Hon'ble Supreme Court in JK Synthetics Ltd., held that an appeal decided ex par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osecution. It was held that the Appellate Tribunal under the Income Tax Act has to dispose of the appeal on merits and cannot short-circuit the same by dismissing it for default of appearance. Placing reliance on the said decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the provisions of Rule 20 of the 1982 Rules are similar to that of the provisions of Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946 and that the Tribunal could not have dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant for want of prosecution and it ought to have decided the appeal on merits even if the appellant or its counsel was not present when the appeal was taken up for hearing. 13. The aforementioned decision would clearly support the case of the appellant befor....