Kiran Ship Breaking Corporation vs Customs, Excise and Service Tax

Akil Kureshi, J.—Appeal is admitted.

At our request, Learned Counsel, Mr. Ravani, accepted the notice on behalf of Respondents. Considering the issue arisen, with consent of learned advocates for the parties, we have proceeded to hear the appeal for final disposal since very limited question is involved.

Appeal is considered for following substantial question of law.

(2) Whether the Tribunal has to decide the issue on merits in accordance with Law to secure the ends of justice or otherwise?

From the record, it emerges that present Appellant-Assessee had preferred Appeal No. C/897/2005 before CESTAT. Such appeal was dismissed on account of non-appearance of the Appellant on numerous count by impugned judgment and order dated 12-11-2009, as it apparent from the order which read as under:

The appeal was listed for hearing on 17-3-2009, 17-6-2009 and 12-11-2009 and on both the occasions and also today no one has appeared on behalf of the Appellants nor there is any request for adjournment. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Counsel for the Appellant referred to judgment of Division Bench of this Court in case of Viral Laminates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India, ; wherein Bench took the view that Tribunal has no power to dismiss the appeal in default. Even in case of non-appearance of the party, appeal should be decided on merits. Following the ratio of decision in case of Viral Laminates Pvt. Ltd. (supra) impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside.

In the result, we answer the question in favour of the Appellant. Consequently, appeal before the Tribunal is restored and may be disposed of in accordance with law. This Tax Appeal is disposed of accordingly.