Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Sree Karpagambal Mills Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 October, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
E/973/2004
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.51/2004-(TVL)(ADK), dated 07.05.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli]
E/1128/2004
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.118/2004, dated 26.05.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Tirunelveli]
E/1129/2004
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.56/2004 (ADK)(TVL), dated 07.05.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli]
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
Honble Shri Pradip Kumar Das, Judicial Member :
Honbe Shri Mathew John, Technical Member :
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 should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in
any authoritative report or not? :
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of
the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? :
M/s. Sree Karpagambal Mills Ltd.
Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli
Respondent
Appearance:
None Shri P. Arul, Supdt. - AR For the Appellant For the Respondent CORAM:
Honble Shri Pradip Kumar Das, Judicial Member Honbe Shri Mathew John, Technical Member Date of hearing : 03-10-2013 Date of decision : 03-10-2013 FINAL ORDER Nos.40480-40482/2013, Dt-29-10-2013 Per Pradip Kumar Das:
As the issue involved in all these appeals are common and, therefore, are take up together for disposal. None appears on behalf of the appellants despite issue of notice and there was any request for adjournment.
2. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that these matters were adjourned on earlier occasions at the request of the appellant. After considering the submission of the learned Authorised Representative and on perusal of record, we find that the appeals are old one and the matters were adjourned on several occasions. It seems that the appellants are not interest in pursuing the appeals. Hence all the appeals are dismissed for non-prosecution. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) (MATHEW JOHN) (PRADIP KUMAR DAS) TECHNICAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ksr DRAFT Remarks I II III Date of dictation 03.10.2013 Draft Order - Date of typing 08-10-2013 Fair Order Typing 28.10.2013 Date of number and date of dispatch 5 E/973/2004, E/1128/2004 and E/1129/2004