M/S. Anya Construction vs Commr. Of Central Excise &
- CitationService Tax Appeal No. 75043/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appellant fails to comply with a direction to make a pre-deposit under the statute, the appeal may be dismissed for that non-compliance, the pre-deposit requirement being applicable to service tax appeals through Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 167/JSR/2012 dated-03.09.2012 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi)
For approval and signature of:
DR.D.M. MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. I.P. LAL, HONBLE 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 ?
M/s. Anya Construction
APPELLANT(S) VERSUS
Commr. of Central Excise & Service Tax-JSR RESPONDENT(S) APPEARANCE
NONE FOR APPELLANT(S) Sri S. N. Mitra, A.C. (A.R.) FOR THE RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM:
DR.D.M. MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. I.P. LAL, HONBLE TECHNICAL MEMBER
DATE OF HEARING & DECISION : 06/07/2015
ORDER NO. FO/A/75361/2015 Per DR.D.M. MISRA Vide order No. SO/75229/2015 dated 12th March, 2015 this Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit Rs.1.00 Lakh within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 18/05/2015. The matter was listed for hearing on 25/05/2015 and adjourned to today i.e. 06/07/2015. Neither the order dated-12/03/2015 nor the Notices of hearing sent by speed post to the appellant by the Registry, returned by the postal department as undelivered.
2. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue submits that since the applicant has not complied with the direction of pre-deposit, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service Tax matters.
3. We find force in the contention of the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the order dated-12/03/2015.
(Dictated & pronounced in the open Court) Sd/- 08/07/15 Sd/- 08/07/15 (DR.I.P.LAL) (DR. D.M. MISRA) TECHNICAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
k.b/-
Service Tax Appeal No. 75043/2013
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