Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Yes & Yes Hi-Tech Promoters India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise, The Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

2016 (4) TMI 239 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dismissal of appeal for non compliance of order for making pre-deposit - Held that:- the original order directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit was passed on 12.12.2014. The time for compliance was fixed as six weeks. The appellant ought to hav .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. As a consequence, the order dismissing the appeal came to be passed long after on 30.6.2015. Once a consequential order is passed, the appellant would have no cause of action as against the original order. Consequently, the order cannot be challeng .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Kirubakaran, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Hari Radhakrishnan For the Respondent : Mr V Sundareswaran, SPC JUDGMENT These appeals arise out of an order directing the appellant/assessee to make a pre-deposit and a consequential order dismissing the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

9.1.2014, the Original Authority levied a demand for service tax to the tune of ₹ 52,60,667/- together with interest and penalty. As against the said order, the appellant filed an appeal before the second respondent along with a petition for wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onditional order nor filed an application for extension of stay nor came up with any appeal. Therefore, the unnumbered appeal was taken up on 30.6.2015 and was dismissed for non compliance with the conditional order. 5. Therefore, the appellant has f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ri Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the appellant that the case of the appellant is squarely covered by a final order passed by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in Anand Construction Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolhapur [(2013) 32 STR 4 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aside, when the appellant has a good case on merits in view of another decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal. 7. We have carefully considered the above submissions. 8. At the outset, the original order directing the appellant to make a pre-de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version