M/S. S.A. Enterprise vs Commr. Of Central Excise , Bolpur

(Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No.119/Bol/2011 dated-01/09/2011 passed by the Commissioner (Appeal-IV) Central Excise, Kolkata)

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. S.A. Enterprise APPELLANT(S) VERSUS Commr. of Central Excise , Bolpur RESPONDENT(S)

APPEARANCE

Sri Arijit Chakraborty, Advocate FOR APPELLANTS Sri A.K. Biswas, Supdt. (A.R.) FOR THE RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

DR. D.M. MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. I.P. LAL, HONBLE TECHNICAL MEMBER

DATE OF HEARING & DECISION : 14.05.2015

ORDER NO.FO/A/75251/15 Per DR. D.M. MISRA

This is an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs.18.11 Lakhs and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 78 and penalty of Rs.5,000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994.

2. At the outset, the Ld. Advocate Shri Arijit Chakraborty, submits that during the course of adjudication, they have paid an amount of Rs.2.00 Lakhs and thereafter paid another Rs.2.94 Lakhs. He submits that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeal) has not decided the issue on merit but dismissed their appeal without considering the merit. He makes an offer to deposit further Rs.1.00 Lakhs and prays that the matter may be remitted to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the issue afresh.

3. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue submits that the Ld. Commissioner has not decided the appeal on merit and he has no objection in remanding the case to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals).

4. After hearing both sides for some time, we find that the appeal itself could be disposed off at this stage. Consequently, the appeal is taken up for disposal with the consent of both sides. We find that the Ld. Commissioner has dismissed the appeal on the ground of default in making pre-deposit. We find that the applicant had already deposited an amount of Rs.4.94 Lakhs and now offers to make further deposit of Rs.1.00 Lakh. Accordingly, the appellant is directed to deposit Rs.1.00 Lakh within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order and report compliance directly to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is remanded to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue on merit afresh without insisting any pre-deposit. Needless to mention that appellant be given adequate opportunity of hearing . All issues are kept open. The appeal is allowed by way of Remand.

( Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)

(DR.I.P.LAL) (DR. D.M. MISRA) TECHNICAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

k.b/-

Service Tax Appeal No. 542/2011

3