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 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S.Concast Steel & Power Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 18 February, 2014

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
      TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
       
Appeal No.S.T. 437/11

(Arising out of Order-in-Original No.CCE/BBSR-II/S.Tax/No.06/COMMISSIONER/2011 dated 15.06.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, BBSR-II.)

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE

HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
HONBLE DR. I.P. LAL, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)

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
    Authorative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
    of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
    Authorities?

 
M/s.Concast Steel & Power Ltd. 
					                        Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, BBSR-II 
							                   Respondent (s)

Appearance:

NONE for the Appellant (s) Shri Anirudha Roy, Supdt.(A.R.) for the Respondent (s) CORAM:
Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) Honble Dr. I.P. Lal, Member(Technical) Date of Hearing:- 18.02.2014 Date of Pronouncement :- 18.02.2014 ORDER NO.FO/A/75052/2014 Per Dr. D.M. Misra.
1. Vide Order No.SO/71456/2013 dated 09.12.2013 this Tribunal has directed the Applicant to deposit Rs.40.00 Lakhs within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 18.02.2014. The order was pronounced in the presence of the Advocate for the Applicant and also dispatched to the Applicant on 26.12.2013, which has not been returned as not served.
2. The Ld.A.R. for the Revenue submits that that the Applicant had not complied with the direction of pre-deposit and prayed that their Appeal be dismissed for non-compliance.
3. We find that the Applicant had not complied with the direction of pre-deposit order dated 09.12.2013. Accordingly their Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F as applicable to Service Tax cases by virtue of Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994.

(Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court.) SD/ SD/ (I.P.LAL) (D.M.MISRA) MEMBER(TECHNICAL) MEMBER(JUDICIAL) sm 2 Appeal No.S.T. 437/11