Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S.Usha Martin Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... on 18 October, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Stay Petition No.SP-567/2009
&
Appeal No.Ex.Ap.397/2009
(Arising out of Order-in-Original No.22/Commissioner/2009 dated 15.04.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedpur.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE SHRI D.N.PANDA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
HONBLE DR. P.BABU, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see
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
CESTAT(Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any
Authorative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities?
M/s.Usha Martin Ltd.
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedpur
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Shri G.K.Mundra, (F.C.A.) for the Appellant (s) Shri S.Mishra, Addl.Commr.(AR) for the Respondent (s) CORAM:
Honble Shri D.N.Panda, Member(Judicial) Honble Dr. P.Babu, Member(Technical) Date of Hearing:- 18.10.2011 Date of Pronouncement :- 18.10.2011 ORDER NO.
Per Shri D.N.Panda.
1. Learned A.R. for Appellant submits that during pendency of the Appeal before Tribunal the matter in controversy has been decided by Honble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCE & ST., LTU, Bangalore vs. ABB Ltd. 2011 (23) S.T.R. 97 (Kar.). Therefore he prays that if the matter goes back to the original authority he shall consider the claim of the Appellant in accordance with law laid down by Honble High Court. We have no difference to the proposition.
2. Learned D.R. also agrees that order to reduce pendency of the matter, let there be an expeditious resolution of the disputes.
3. With the aforesaid proposition of both sides we dispose of Stay Petition waiving the requirement of pre-deposit and remand the Appeal for expeditious disposal at the level of the original authority in accordance with law. The Appellant is required to provide all details to the original authority to enable him to re-do the adjudication. In the result both Stay Application and Appeal are disposed of.
4. Learned A.R. for Appellant at this juncture submits that since the matter is in open remand all legal aspects be kept open for arguing before the authority. We do not disagree with his proposition.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.) Sd/ sd/ (P.BABU) (D.N.PANDA) MEMBER(TECHNICAL) MEMBER(JUDICIAL) sm 3 Appeal No.Ex.Ap.397/2009