Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1151 - AT - Service TaxRectification of Mistake - The Revenue has stated that the Final Order passed by the Tribunal has held that the present appeal cannot proceed and will abate in view of Rule 22 and accordingly, held that the demand also abates - proceedings against deceased person - Section 86(7) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that:- As per Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, the appeal shall abate on the death of the appellant unless an application is made for continuation of such proceedings by or against the successor in interest, executor, administrator, receiver, liquidator or other legal representatives of the appellant or applicant or respondent, as the case may be. The widow of the proprietor is not contesting the appeal on merit but only filed the appeal because the show-cause notice has been served on her demanding the duty against the dead man and in her appeal, she has categorically stated that the show-cause notice against the dead person is not legally sustainable. In the Final Order No.23254/2017 dated 14.12.2017, we have observed that the proprietor Shri Harsha P.S. has died during the pendency of the appeal whereas actually he died much before the issuance of show-cause notice. This is the only error in the Final Order and therefore, we allow the application of the window and hold that the proprietor died much before the issuance of show-cause notice and has not died during the pendency of the appeal. ROM application allowed.
|