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 2]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S Bharati Airtel Ltd vs C.C.E., Panchkula on 17 October, 2011

        

 
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
West Block No.2, R.K.Puram, New Delhi

COURT-I

        Date of hearing/decision:17.10.2011

    
Service Tax Appeal No.1737 of 2010

Arising out of the order in appeal No.506/S.Tax/D-II/10 dated 13.9.2010   passed by the Commissioner (Appeals),  Central Excise, Delhi II.

For Approval and Signature:
Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President
Honble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member
1
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 26 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2
Whether it should be released under Rule 26 of 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?
Seen
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes

	M/s Bharati Airtel Ltd.				 	..		Appellants
  
Vs.

C.C.E., Panchkula 						     .	        Respondent

Appearance:

None for the appellants Shri Amrish Jain, DR for the respondent Coram: Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President Honble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member Oral Order No.____________________ Per Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram:
The assessee has not complied with the requirement of pre-deposit as per Stay Order No.ST/631/11 dated 5.9.11. Hence the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the statutory requirement of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
(Jyoti Balasumdaram) Vice President (Rakesh Kumar) Technical Member scd/