Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. M M Dyeing And Finishing Mills P Ltd vs Cce, Ludhiana on 14 August, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. III Excise Appeal No. 55402 of 2013-EX[DB] [Arising out of Order-In-Original No. 545/CE/Appl/CHD-II/2012 dated 1.11.2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise(A) , Chandigarh II] For approval and signature: Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, 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 authoritative report or not? 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 M/s. M M Dyeing and Finishing Mills P Ltd. Appellants Vs. CCE, Ludhiana Respondent
Appearance:
None for the Appellants Shri V P Batra, DR for the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing/decision : 14.08.2013 ORDER NO. FO /A/ 57374 /2013-Ex(Br) Per Archana Wadhwa (for the Bench):
Vide stay order No. 56900/2013 dated 4.3.13, applicant was directed to make the pre-deposit of Rs.3 lakhs, in addition to deposit of Rs.2 lakhs already made, within a period of 6 weeks from that date and report compliance on 29.5.2013. When the matter came subsequently for ascertaining compliance, the Bench observed that there was no compliance to the said stay order. Accordingly, the Bench vide their order dated 5.7.2013 directed to issue a notice to the appellant to show cause as to why their appeal should not be dismissed for non-compliance.
2. On matter being called today for ascertaining compliance, neither anybody appeared nor is there any compliance report on record. Further the appellant have also not filed any reply to the show cause notice issued to them for dismissal of the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for non-compliance under the provisions of section 35 F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with the stay order and the subsequent Misc. order referred supra.
(pronounced in the open court)
( Archana Wadhwa ) Member(Judicial)
( Rakesh Kumar ) Member(Technical)
ss
??
??
??
??
2