M/S. Sandip Commercial Corporation vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Bolpur

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.117/Bol/2011 dated 01.09.2011 passed by the Commissioner(Appeal-IV) of Central Excise, Kolkata.)

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. Sandip Commercial Corporation Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)

Vs.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur Respondent (s)

Appearance:

Shri S.B.Sharma, Advocate for the Appellant (s)

Shri A.Roy, Supdt.(AR) for the Respondent (s)

CORAM:

Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) Honble Dr. I.P. Lal, Member(Technical)

Date of Hearing:- 08.04.2015 Date of Pronouncement :- 08.04.2015

ORDER NO.FO/A/75205/2015

Per Dr. D.M. Misra.

1. This is an Application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax of Rs.19.50 Lakhs and equal amount of penalty imposed under section 78 and penalties under other provisions of Finance Act, 1994.

2. At the outset Shri S.B.Sharma, ld.Advocate for the Applicant submits that ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has not decided the issue on merit, but dismissed for default in making pre-deposit of Rs.10.00 Lakhs as a condition to hear their Appeal. He submits that the Applicants financial condition is not good and depositing Rs.10.00 Lakhs would be impossible on their part. However, under the instruction of the Applicant he offers to deposit Rs.2.00 Lakhs and prays that the matter may be remanded to the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) for deciding the issue afresh.

3. The ld.A.R. does not have any objection in remanding the matter to the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) for deciding the issue afresh.

4. After hearing both sides for some time we find that the appeal itself could be disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, with the consent of both sides we take up the appeal itself for disposal.

5. We find that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has not decided the issue on merit, but dismissed for default for making pre-deposit of Rs.10.00 Lakhs as a condition to hear their Appeals. Considering the financial hardship expressed by the Appellant we are of the opinion that the offer made by the Appellant to deposit Rs.2.00 Lakhs seems to be reasonable. Accordingly, we direct the Appellant to deposit Rs.2.00 Lakhs within a period of 8(eight) weeks from the date of communication of the order and report compliance directly to the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals). Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) after recording compliance would proceed to hear the Appeal. Needless to mention a reasonable opportunity of hearing may be granted to the Appellant. All issues are kept open. Appeal is allowed by way of remand. Stay Petition disposed of.

(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)

SD/ SD/

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

3 Appeal No. S.T. 524/11