Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Anand Cine Service vs Commissioner Of Service Tax, Chennai on 21 March, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
ST/213/2012
(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 18/2010 dated 14.10.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV, Chennai)
For approval and signature:
Honble Shri P.K. Das, Judicial Member
Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member
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 authoritative report or not?
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
M/s. Anand Cine Service Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai Respondent
Appearance Shri Manoj, Advocate, for the Appellant Shri P. Arul, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent CORAM Honble Shri P.K. Das, Judicial Member Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member Date of Hearing: 21.03.2014 Date of Decision: 21.03.2014 Final Order No.40196/2014 Per P.K. Das By Stay Order No. 42083/2013 dated 26.8.2013, the appellant was directed to make a predeposit of Rs.70 lakhs within a period of eight weeks and to report compliance on 7.11.2013. The learned counsel submits that they filed writ petition before the Honble Madras High Court and the Honble High Court vide order dated 30.10.2013 dismissed the writ petition and directed the appellant to file CMA within a period of three weeks. Today, the learned counsel submits that they have filed CMA and it is yet to be listed.
2. On perusal of the records, we find that vide Note Order dated 9.1.2014 and 5.2.2014, after considering the various orders of the Honble High Courts, directed the appellant to produce a stay order against the Tribunals order. On a query from the Bench, the learned counsel neither produced any stay order from the higher forum nor has complied with the stay order dated 26.8.2013 of the Tribunal. In view of that the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(Rakesh Kumar) (P.K. Das)
Technical Member Judicial Member
Rex