M/S. Perfect Technologies vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & ...
- CitationAppeal No.S.T. 76429/14
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal is liable to be dismissed for non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit requirement under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as applied to Service Tax matters by section 83 of the Finance Act, where the defects notified by the Registry have not been removed.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of Order-in-Original No.03/COMM/ST/SLG/09-10 dated 09.12.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Siliguri.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) HONBLE DR. I.P. LAL, 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?
M/s. Perfect Technologies Applicant (s)/Appellant (s) Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Siliguri Respondent (s)
Appearance:
NONE for the Appellant (s) Shri A.K.Biswas, Supdt.(A.R.) for the Respondent (s)
CORAM:
Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) Honble Dr. I.P. Lal, Member(Technical)
Date of Hearing:- 13.05.2015 Date of Pronouncement :- 13.05.2015
ORDER NO.FO/A/75259/15
Per Dr. D.M. Misra.
1. The appeal was filed on 05.11.2014. Since the Applicant had not complied with the amended provision of section 35F, as applicable to Service Tax matter by virtue of section 83 of the Finance Act, a defect memo was issued to them on 25.12.2014, 13.3.2015, 10.4.2015 by the Registry. As the defects were not removed, the appeals are placed before the Bench for direction.
2. The ld.A.R. for the Revenue submits that this Tribunal has already taken a view in the case of A.I. Champdani Industries, Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Ltd. vs. CCE vide order No.A-75007-75010/2015 dated 05.012015. dismissing the appeals for non-compliance with the provisions of section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944.
3. Following the said precedent the present appeal is also liable for dismissal for non-compliance with the statutory requirement of section 35F of Central Excise Act as applicable to Service Tax matters. Appeal dismissed, Stay petition disposed of.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)
SD/ SD/
(I.P.LAL) (D.M.MISRA) MEMBER(TECHNICAL) MEMBER(JUDICIAL) sm
2 Appeal No. S.T. 76429/14
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