Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Kohinoor Publicity vs Cce & St, Jaipur I on 20 September, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110 066. Principal Bench, New Delhi COURT NO. IV DATE OF HEARING : 20/09/2016. DATE OF DECISION : 20/09/2016. Service Tax Appeal No. 60531 of 2013 [Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 116 (VC) ST/JPR-I/2013 dated 28.08.2013/06.09.2013 passed by The Commissioner (Appeals I), Central Excise Commissionerate, Jaipur.] For Approval and signature : Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri V. Padmanabhan, 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 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 Kohinoor Publicity Appellant Versus CCE & ST, Jaipur I Respondent
Appearance Shri Vijayah Khongal, C.S. for the appellant.
Ms. Neha Garg, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Respondent.
CORAM :Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Final Order No. 53676/2016 Dated : 20/09/2016 Per. Archana Wadhwa :-
Vide stay order No. SO/50017/2016 CU (DB) dated 05/01/2016, the appellant was directed to deposit the entire amount of service tax alongwith proportionate interest within a period of six weeks as a condition of hearing their appeal and in terms of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. The said stay order of the Tribunal was put to challenge before the Honble High Court of Rajasthan. The writ-petition so filed by the appellant was taken note of by the Honble Rajasthan High Court and vide their order dated 29/3/16, the appellant was directed to deposit the component of service tax in terms of the stay order dated 05/1/16, within a period of eight weeks.
2. Thereafter the matter has come up on record number of times and was being repeatedly adjourned. On matter being called today for ascertaining compliance with the stay order of the Tribunal readwith the order dated 29/3/16 passed by the Honble Rajasthan High Court, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant fairly agrees that the said orders do not stand complied with by them. However, he submits that a review petition stands filed before the Honble High Court which is yet to be disposed of. Learned Advocate fairly agrees that there is no stay of operation of the above referred order of the Honble High Court. He accordingly prays for adjourning the matter.
3. Objecting to the above prayer of the learned Advocate, Ms. Neha Garg, learned DR appearing for the Revenue submits that the Tribunals stay order stand confirmed by the Honble High Court in so far as the quantum of service tax is concerned. The matter had earlier come up on record and was being adjourned in the interest of justice. In the absence of any stay of the earlier order of the Honble high Court, their appeal has become liable to be dismissed and she accordingly press for dismissal of the appeal.
4. Admittedly, the appellants have not honoured the High Courts order within the period granted by the Honble High Court. Further in the absence of stay of the stay order, we agree with the learned DR for dismissal the appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed for non-compliance with the provision of Section 35F of Central Excise Act readwith the stay order of the Tribunal and the order of the Honble High Court of Rajasthan, with liberty to the appellant to apply for restoration, in case the Honble High Court proceeded in their favour.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) (V. Padmanabhan) Member (Technical) PK ??
??
??
??
2