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 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Arisudana Industries Ltd vs Cce & St, Ludhiana on 29 April, 2015

        

 


	



CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 

WEST BLOCK NO.II, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI-110066.



SINGLE MEMBER BENCH

Court-II



Appeal No.E/50368/2015



(Arising out of Stay Order No.12/CE/Stay/Ldh/14 dt.1.10.14 passed by the CCE(Appeals), Chandigarh-I)



                                               Date of Hearing/Decision: 29.04.2015





For Approval &signature:



Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)



1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3.
Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
seen
4.
Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
Yes


                                      

Arisudana Industries Ltd.						Appellant



                        Vs.

CCE & ST, Ludhiana							Respondent
Present for the Appellant:       Shri Naveen Bindal, Advocate

Present for the Respondent:    Shri R.K.Mishra, AR



Coram: Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

             



FINAL ORDER NO.51482/2015



PER: ASHOK JINDAL 



Considering the fact that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not decided the issue on merits and directed the appellant to make pre-deposit of Rs.7 lakhs for entertaining the appeal of the appellant, against that order, the appellant is before me.

2. Considering that the appellant have deposited Rs.70,000/- for entertaining the appeal before this Tribunal, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to remand the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue on merits. In the circumstances, I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Commissioner (appeals) to decide issue on merits without insisting on pre-deposit after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

3. The appeal is disposed in the above terms.

(Dictated & Pronounced in the open court) (ASHOK JINDAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) mk 3 3