Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Adhikrut Jabti Evem Vasuli vs C.C.E. & S.T. - Indore on 16 July, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL West Block No.2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110 066. Date of Hearing 16.7.2013 STAY APPLICATION No.ST/Stay/4611/2012-CU[DB] IN APPEAL NO.ST/3616/2012-CU[DB] [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.IND/CEX/000APP/238 & 239/12, dated 08-08-2012 passed by the CCE & ST (Appeals-I), Indore] For Approval & Signature : Honble Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical) 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? Yes 3. Whether Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? Seen 4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities? Yes Adhikrut Jabti Evem Vasuli Appellant Vs. C.C.E. & S.T. - Indore Respondent
Appearance None - for the appellant Shri A. Jain, DR - for the respondent CORAM: Honble Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical) Final Order No.57091 dated 16-07-2013 Per Justice G. Raghuram :
The adjudication order dated 02-03-2012 confirmed the service tax liability of Rs.21,64,594/- besides interest and penalty as stipulated. The appellant/assessee preferred an appeal, which was disposed of by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 27-08-2012, confirming the tax demand but modifying the order in so far as penalties. By the order dated 10-06-2013, the stay application was disposed of directing the appellant/assessee to remit 50% of the basic demand (excluding interest) within 4 weeks and report compliance by 16-07-2013 and that in default of either deposit or reporting compliance within the time specified in the order, the appeal would be dismissed for of failure to deposit.
2. The Registrar recorded on 12-07-2013 that no proof of deposit was furnished as directed.
3. The matter has come up for compliance and no proof of deposit is filed. The consultant for the appellant has however addressed a letter dated 15-07-2013 to the Assistant Registrar stating that the appellant had decided to file an appeal before the High Court and the Tribunal may await the result of the appeal to be preferred by the appellant. Since the order dated 10-06-2013 is a self-executing order appending, a default clause and the assessee has failed to deposit as directed, the appeal stands dismissed in terms of the order dated 10-06-2013 and is recorded accordingly.
(Justice G. Raghuram) President (Sahab Singh) Member (Technical) SSK