Catering Inn vs Commissioner Of Service Tax ...
- CitationAppeal No. 16-2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal stands dismissed for non-compliance with a pre-deposit condition under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, read with an earlier stay order requiring deposit of the disputed service tax with interest within a fixed period, where no compliance was shown when the matter was called.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 16-2013 dated 12/02/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax , BANGALORE-II( Appeal) ]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
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?
4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Catering Inn 672/41/1,8th Main Road, Yeshwantpur, BANGALORE - 560022 KARNATAKA Appellant(s)
Versus
Commissioner of Service Tax BANGALORE-SERVICE TAX NULL 1ST TO 5TH FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING,above BMTC BUS STAND,DOMLUR BANGALORE, - 560071 KARNATAKA Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None For the Appellant
Shri S. Ilangovan, Asst. Commissioner(AR) For the Respondent
Date of Hearing: 17/06/2015
Date of Decision: 17/06/2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Final Order No. 21369 / 2015
Per : ARCHANA WADHWA
Vide Misc. Order No.23140/2014 dt. 20/11/2014, appellant was directed to deposit the entire amount of service tax along with interest and the amounts already paid by them. The said deposits were required to be made within a period of 8 weeks.
2. On matter being called today for ascertaining compliance, neither anybody appeared nor is there any compliance report on record. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act read with the stay order referred supra. (Order pronounced and dictated in open court)
B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER
Raja.
2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free