Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Software Technology Parks Of India vs Cce, Noida on 23 August, 2013
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, West Block No.2, R.K.Puram, New Delhi COURT-I Date of hearing/decision: 23.08.2013 For Approval and Signature: Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Technical Member 1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 26 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 26 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Service Tax Appeal No. 74 of 2009 (Arising out of the Order-in-Original No. 122/CE/Appl/Noida/08 dated 23.10.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida). M/s Software Technology Parks of India Appellant Vs. CCE, Noida Respondent
Appearance: None for the appellant Shri Amresh Jain, DR for the Revenue Coram: Honble Mr. Justice G.Raghuram, President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Technical Member Final Order No. 57355/ 2013 Per Justice G. Raghuram:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the appellate order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Noida-II dated 23.10.2008. The appellant had preferred an appeal against the adjudication order dated 31.12.2007 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Noida confirming service tax demand of Rs. 31,37,505/-; ordering recovery of interest as specified and imposing penalties under Sections 76 & 77 of the Act. On appeal the appellate authority upheld the adjudication order in all respects except for reduction of penalties imposed, to the extent indicated in the order.
2. The notice of hearing of this appeal of the year 2009 and the connected appeal S.T. 98 of 2009 preferred by the Revenue, was forwarded to the appellant and its Consultant on 25.07.2013. There is however no representation on behalf of the appellant when this appeal is taken up for hearing. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(Justice G. Raghuram) President (Sahab Singh) Technical Member Pant