Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Wanbury Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Raigad on 17 September, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT No. I APPLICATION No. ST/S/95834/13-Mum APPEAL No. ST/87366/13-Mum (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. US/73/RGD/2013 dated 28.2.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-II) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President Honble Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) ======================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No 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 Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
====================================================== Wanbury Ltd. Appellant Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad Respondent Appearance:
Shri B. Raichandani, Advocate, for appellant Ms. D.M. Durando, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President Honble Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing: 17.9.2013 Date of Decision: 17.9.2013 ORDER NO Per: S.S. Kang The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of dues. The applicant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the adjudication order whereby the demand of Rs.6,95,494/- is confirmed with interest and penalties. The applicant had already paid an amount of Rs.5,34,617/- during investigation. The Commissioner (Appeals), on the application filed for waiver of dues, directed the applicant to deposit an amount of Rs.1,60,837/- for hearing of the appeal. The applicant had deposited an amount of Rs.1,50,000/-. As the applicant had not fully complied with the conditions of the stay order, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal, without going into the merits, for non-compliance to the conditions of the stay order.
2. Now, during arguments, the applicant undertakes to deposit the amount as per the stay order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) within a period of four weeks from today. In these circumstances, the applicant is directed to deposit an amount of Rs.10,837/- within a period of four weeks.
3. As the Commissioner (Appeals) had not decided the appeal on merits, therefore the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to decide the appeal on merits, on showing the deposit of the above mentioned amount, and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.
(Dictated in Court) (P.K. Jain) Member (Technical) (S.S. Kang) Vice President tvu 1 3