Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
) M/S.The Ganges Manufacturing Co.Ltd vs & 2) Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 5 January, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
1-3) Stay Petition Nos.SP-75430-75432/15
&
4-6) Appeal Nos.EA-75542-75544/15
(Arising out of Order-in-Original No.
1 & 4) 07/Commissioner/CE/Kol-IV/2015 dated 17.03.2015
2 & 5) 08/Commissioner/CE/Kol-IV/2015 dated 17.03.2015
Both above passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-IV.
AND
3 & 6) 19/COMMR./CE/KOL-II/Adjn/2014-15 dated 17.03.2015 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
HONBLE SHRI H.K.THAKUR, 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?
1) M/s.The Ganges Manufacturing Co.Ltd.
2) M/s.The Ganges Jute Pvt.Ltd.
3) M/s.Mahadeo Jute & Industries Ltd.
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
1 & 2) Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-IV
3) Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Shri S.Bagaria, Advocate & Shri P. Banerjee, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri S.N.Mitra, AC(AR) for the Respondent (s) CORAM:
Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) Honble Shri H.K.Thakur, Member(Technical) Date of Hearing:- 05.01.2016 Date of Pronouncement :- 05.01.2016 ORDER NO.FO/A/75089-75091/2016 & SO/75013-75015/2016 Per Dr. D.M. Misra.
Heard both sides.
2. The ld. A.R. for the Revenue submits that in spite of issuance of defect memos for compliance with the condition of predeposit of 7.5% of duty as the appeals have been filed after 6th August, 2014, the Appellants did not comply with the said defect memos. He submits that in view of amended Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944, the Appellants are required to deposit the said amount. It is his submission that as the Appellants had not complied with the said provision, their appeals are liable for dismissal.
3. We find force in the submission of the ld.A.R. for the Revenue. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Appeals dismissed.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)
SD/ SD/
(H.K.THAKUR) (D.M.MISRA)
MEMBER(TECHNICAL) MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
sm
2
Appeal No.EA-75542-75544/15