2008 (3) TMI 195

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the respondent, Shri Mohammed Hussain Abdul Sattar, on restoration application was not tallying with the signatures available with records of the department. 2. The respondent was ordered to pre-deposit 50% of the duty demand by the CESTAT vide its order Nos. S/621-622/WZB/06/CSTB/C-II, dated 4-8-2006. The appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of CESTAT's order No. A/2216/WZR/06-C-II dated 13-11-2036. Miscellaneous application for restoration of appeal was filed by the respondent which was allowed vide order No. M/284/2007/C-I, dated 5-4-2007. After restoration, stay application was heard a fresh and vide CESTAT's order No. S/512/WZB/2007/CSTB/C-I, dated 27-7-2007, pre-deposit of the duty of excise and equal amount of penalty was waiv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on fraudulent documents and on bringing this fact to its notice the Tribunal ought to recall the said order of 5-4-07 restoring the stay application as it is an error apparent on records. In view of this position it was submitted that the finding of the CESTAT in order dated 19-11-07 that "revenue was not challenging application for restoration of appeal on the ground of disputed signature of the applicant" is not correct because in filing of application for restoration of stay application, fraud has been committed and for this reason alone the applicant has filed rectification of mistake application on 30-8-07. In view of this it was prayed that the Tribunal may consider taking such action as has been considered at Para 5 in the case of Ba....