ISPL INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CEN. EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was filed along with an application for waiver of pre -deposit of the duty and penalty. In the stay application, financial hardship was not pleaded. The Tribunal passed order on 23.6.01. This order was ex -parte because in spite of notice the appellant had not appeared. On examination of balance sheet placed on record, the Tribunal directed the appellant to pre -deposit Rs. 1.80 lakhs. Today, when the matter was posted for compliance no one is present but there is a written submission to the effect that a reference was made to BIFR on 7.9.2000. It is claimed that when a reference is made, no action can be taken against the appellant without the consent of BIFR. This statement is without merit. In the absence of pleadings in the appeal papers and in the absence of any substantiation of the claim, I dismiss this appeal for non compliance of the Tribunal order in terms of Sec 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.