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 1]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S Hindustan Institute Of Aeronautics vs Cst, Bhopal on 11 August, 2015

        

 
	                    IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi  110 066.



		Date of Hearing/Order :  11.8.2015  

                                                                                                                        

           No. ST/Stay/51585/2014 & ST/51345/2014      -CU(DB)



(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. BPL-EXCUS-000-APP-026-13-14 dated 20.2.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise,  (Appeals), Bhopal)  



For Approval & Signature :



Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President

Honble Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical)



1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the 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 Department Authorities?



M/s Hindustan Institute of Aeronautics                                    Appellant

 

Vs.



CST, Bhopal                                                                       Respondent

Appearance:

Shri A. Gurumurthy, Advocate		  -	    for the Appellant



Ms. Suchitra Sharma, D.R.                   -            for the Respondent

						                                



Coram :	Honble Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical)

		Honble Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial)

         

 

   		      F. Order No.52561/2015

 

Per R.K. Singh :



Ld. Advocate pleads that this is an appeal filed against the pre-deposit ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the meanwhile the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed its appeal on the ground of failure of pre-deposit and against that order of Commissioner (Appeals) it has already filed appeal in CESTAT by virtue of which this appeal has rendered infructuous.

2. The ld. DR has no objection to dismissal of this appeal as infructuous.

3. In view of the foregoing and as Commissioner (Appeals) has already dismissed appellants appeal rendering the present appeal against pre-deposit order of Commissioner (Appeals) infructuous, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

(R.K. Singh) Member (Technical) (Sulekha Beevi, C.S.) Member (Judicial) RM 1