Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Visakhapatnam vs M/S. Hindustan Zinc Ltd on 22 October, 2010
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT BANGALORE
Bench Division Bench
Court II
Date of Hearing:22/10/2010
Date of decision:22/10/2010
Appeal No.E/764/09
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.41/2009(V-I)ST dt. 19/3/2009 CCE,C&ST(Appeals), Visakhapatnam)
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. M.V.Ravindran, Member(Judicial)
1.
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3.
Whether their Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen
4.
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
CCE, Visakhapatnam
..Appellant(s)
Vs.
M/s. Hindustan Zinc Ltd.
..Respondent(s)
Appearance Mr. K.S. Chandrasekar, JDR for the Revenue.
None for the respondent.
Coram:
Honble Mr. M.V.Ravindran, Member(Judicial) FINAL ORDER No._______________________2010 Per M.V.Ravindran When this appeal was called out, I find that this appeal was called out on 7/9/2010, certain defects were found, not removed by the appellants. On 7/9/2010, a direction was given to the lower authorities to rectify the defects as pointed out by the Registry by the letter dt. 28/12/2009. Ld. DR submits that he has not received any communication from the concerned Commissionerate as regards the defects being removed or proposal to remove the defects.
2. I find from the records that this appeal was filed by the Revenue on 11/08/2009 and on 28/12/2009, Registry had communicated to the concerned Commissionerate (the appellant herein) for removal of the defects as indicated in the said defect memo. Despite such communication, the appellants have not removed the defects. It is notice that this matter has came up for disposal many times and defects remained. It is to be noticed despite these being a specific direction of the Bench on 7/9/2010 to remove the defects, the same are not yet removed and nor any communication from the concerned Commissionerate. To my mind, the appellants are not serious in prosecuting this appeal as the defects are not removed diligently. In view of this, I dismiss the appeal as not maintainable.
3. Before parting with the case, Registry is directed that copy of this order be sent to the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi, Chief Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, Office of the Chief Department Representative, New Delhi and office of the Jt. Chief Department Representative, Bangalore to take up the issue in a correct perspective and avoid similar situations.
(Pronounced and dictated in open court) (M.V. RAVINDRAN) Member (Judicial) Nr 3