Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Sarvodaya Ssk Ltd vs Cce Kolhapur on 23 February, 2015

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT No. I

Appeal No. ST/86457/14 - Arising out of Order-in-Original/Appeal No. KLH-EXCUS-000-COM-017-13-14  dated 17.12.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Kolhapur, 

Appeal No. 87434, 87435/14 - Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 08/ST-11/RS/2014 dated 27.02.2014, passed by Commissioner of Service Tax Mumbai II,   

Appeal No. 89835/14 - Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AV(161)170/2014 dated 30.07.2014  passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad)

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical)

================================================

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities ======================================== Sarvodaya SSK Ltd. Spanco BPO Services Ltd. Kapil Puri Ayush Marketing Appellant Vs. CCE Kolhapur Respondent Appearance:

None for appellant Shri B. Kumar Iyer, Supdt. (AR) for respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing: 23.02.2015 Date of Decision: 23.02.2015 ORDER NO Per: M.V. Ravindran These matters are listed today for ascertaining the compliance of removal of defects.
2. It is seen from the records that the appellants have not removed the defects as indicated by the Registry within time. In view of the above, the appeals are dismissed as non-maintainable.

(Dictated in Court) (P.R. Chandrasekharan) Member (Technical) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial) nsk ??

??

??

??

1 2