Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
N. C. Enterprisers vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 29 January, 2015
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Appeal(s) Involved: ST/1431/2012-DB [Arising out of Order-In-Original No. VIZ-STX-001-COM-026-12 dated 14/02/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Visakhapatnam] For approval and signature: HON'BLE Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Mr. B.S.V. MURTHY, 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? 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 Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes N. C. Enterprisers 28-2-47, Daspalla Centre, 1st Floor Surya Bagh, Visakhapatnam - 530 020 Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Visakhapatnam-I Central Excise Building Port Area Visakhapatnam 530 035 Andhra Pradesh Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. L.S. Karthikeyan, Advocate 4th Floor, World Trade Centre, Brigade Gateway Campus 26/1, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Malleswaram West, Bangalore 560 055 For the Appellant Mr. S. Ila, AR For the Respondent Date of Hearing: 29/01/2015 Date of Decision: 29/01/2015 CORAM:
HON'BLE Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Mr. B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER Final Order No. 20158 / 2015 Per : ARCHANA WADHWA Vide Miscellaneous Order No. 28306/2013 dated 31.12.2013 the appellant was directed to deposit 50% of the service tax demand along with interest due on wrongly availed credit within a period of eight weeks. Subsequently the appellant filed modification application, which was also rejected vide Miscellaneous Order No. 21036/2014 dated 24.04.2014. However the period to deposit was extended by another eight weeks and the matter was required to be reported for compliance on 10.07.2014. On matter being called today for ascertaining compliance with the Stay Order, learned advocate appearing for the appellant fairly agrees that the same has not been complied with. However he submits that he filed an appeal against the Stay Order on 30.06.2014 before the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Further he fairly agrees that the matter has not been taken up by the High Court and there is no stay of operation of the said order.
2. We note that the Stay Order was passed on 31.12.2013 and the modification order was passed on 24.04.2014 extending the period to deposit by another eight weeks the said period of eight weeks expired on or around 26.06.2014. The appellants had challenged the Stay Order before the Honble High Court after the expiry of the period granted by the Tribunal. Further it has been more than a year that the Stay Order was passed and the appellants have not complied with the Stay Order passed by the Tribunal. The Stay Order was passed after taking into consideration merits of the case as also the financial condition of the appellant which reflected them as a profit making unit. In such a scenario, the appellants action of not depositing the directed amount cannot be appreciated and the appeal cannot be kept on record.
3. In view of the above we dismiss the appeal itself for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act read with the Stay Order referred supra.
(Order pronounced and dictated in open court) (B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER (ARCHANA WADHWA) JUDICIAL MEMBER iss