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 1, Cited by 1]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Mc Consulting Engineers Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 4 April, 2014

        

 
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
BANGALORE

Final Order No .    20440 / 2014    

Application(s) Involved:

ST/Stay/20638/2014    in    ST/20650/2014-DB

Appeal(s) Involved:

ST/20650/2014-DB 



[Arising out of Order in Appeal 215-2013 dated 23/12/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax , , 



Mc Consulting Engineers Pvt Ltd
Mc Design House, 27, Rohini Layout, Madhapur, Hitec City,
HYDERABAD
AP
500081 
Appellant(s)




Versus


Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax - Hyderabad-ii 
L.B STADIUM ROAD,
BASHEERBAGH, 
HYDERABAD,
ANDHRA PRADESH
500004
Respondent(s)

Appearance:

V.J. SANKARAM ADV 7-1-216/4 KUSHBOO SILK SHOWROOM, BALKAMPET, HYDERABAD-16 For the Appellant Shri N. Jagdish, Superintendent(AR) For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 04/04/2014 Date of Decision: 04/04/2014 Order Per : B.S.V.MURTHY As per the Order in Stay petition No. 11/2013 (H-IV) S.Tax dated 6-22013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (Appeals) a deposit of Rs.25,69,430/- which is 50% of the amount of R.S.51,38,860/- confirmed by the original authority is required to be deposited by the appellants. The deposit was to be made by 19-2-2013. The appellants paid earlier Rs.11,20,714/- with interest before the original authority. Hence an amount of Rs. 14,48,716/- was to have been further deposited before Commissioner (Appeals) by 19-2-2013 and subject to that deposit hearing was granted on 21-2-2013. Appellant filed a letter dated 192-2013 seeking further time of 2 months due to financial hardship. One more letter dated 18-3-2013 was filed seeking further time of 3 months. However, Commissioner (Appeals) fixed hearing on 28-3-2013. On 26-3-2013 the appellant deposited Rs. 5 lakhs and they could not pay the remaining amount of Rs. 9,48,716/-. Their petition dated 28-3-2013 could be filed only on 1-4-2103 due to intervening holidays (Holi, Good Friday and Sunday). In that letter, a request was made for granting further time. Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal by OIA No. 64/2013 dated 30-3-2013 for default. Thereafter appeal was filed before CESTAT praying for permission to pay the further amount of Rs. 9,48,716/-. Tribunal appreciated financial difficulties and directed the appellants to deposit the amount ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals), vide final order No. 26633/2013 dated 27-92013 The Commissioner (Appeals) in OIA No. 215/2013 (H-IV) S.Tax dated 25-12-2013 held that as per the order of Tribunal the appellants should have deposited the ordered sum by 22-11-2013 and should have submitted chalans by 29-11-2013. As the appellants could not deposit the sum the learned Commissioner (Appeals) dismised the appeal for non-compliance.

2. The appellant submitted that the entire amount as per the directions of the Tribunal has been deposited between 24/12/2013 and 24/1/2014 with great difficulty because of deep financial trouble the appellant is facing.

3. The learned counsel requested that the delay in making the deposit may be condoned and Commissioner(Appeals) be directed to hear the appeal on merits. He relies on the following decisions to submit that in such cases, in precedent decisions Tribunal had condoned the delay and remanded the matter.

a. Skyron Overseas Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Surat [2012(278) ELT 205 (Tri. Ahmd.)] b. Harish Dyeing & Printing Works Vs. UOI [2013(289) ELT 93 (Guj.)]

4. After considering the submissions and the precedent decisions cited by the learned counsel, we find that the issue is covered by the precedent decisions. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner(Appeals) with a request to decide the appeal in accordance with law and according to merits treating the amount as fully deposited as per the directions of the Tribunal. (Operative portion of the order pronounced in open court) S.K. MOHANTY JUDICIAL MEMBER B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER Raja.

3