9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed order wherein their appeal has been dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order directing them to make the pre-deposit of Rs.2.00 Lakhs against the total demand of Rs.6,27,387/-. The facts of the case are that on verification, it has been found that the vehicle number entered in the invoice do not match with the vehicles in which the goods were supplied. Therefore, it was found that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e invoices as submitted by the transporter themselves. Therefore, the allegation that they were not received the goods deserve no merit and no further investigation has been taken place. He further submitted that the factory of the appellant is closed since 2002 and prayed for financial hardship also. Therefore, he prayed that unconditional waiver of pre-deposit may be granted and the matter may b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t their factory is closed in 2002. In that situation, it is the duty of the Tribunal to protect interest of Revenue also. In these circumstances, I direct the applicant to make a pre-deposit of Rs.1.5 Lakhs and report compliance before the Commissioner (Appeals) on or before 29th December, 2011. On such compliance, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall decide the issue on merit without insisting any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
