M/S. Innoiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cc, Tuticorin - Court Judgment |
| Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai |
| Jan-09-2014 |
| C/40714 of 2013 (Arising Out of Order-in-Appeal No. 19 of 2013 dated 21.02.2013, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Chennai). |
| THE HONOURABLE MR. P.K. DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MR. MATHEW JOHN, TECHNICAL MEMBER |
| M/S. Innoiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd. |
| Cc, Tuticorin |
p.k. das, j. 1. by stay order no. 42429 and 42430/2013 dated 09.10.2013, the applicant was directed to make a further deposit of rs. 2.00 lakhs within a period of six weeks and report compliance on 03.12.2013. the applicant filed a miscellaneous application no. c/42157/13 for modification of the stay order no. 42429-49430/2013. by miscellaneous order no. 42823/2013 dated 03.12.2013, the application was disposed of with a direction to extend the period of compliance of the stay order by further four weeks and report compliance on 09.01.2014. today, the ld. advocate submits that they have filed cma before the honble high court of madras. but there is no record before the bench that the applicant filed any appeal before the hon/ble high court.2. after considering the submissions of both sides, we find that the tribunal has already extended the period of compliance and no compliance was made. hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order.
P.K. Das, J.
1. By Stay Order No. 42429 and 42430/2013 dated 09.10.2013, the applicant was directed to make a further deposit of Rs. 2.00 lakhs within a period of six weeks and report compliance on 03.12.2013. The applicant filed a miscellaneous application No. C/42157/13 for modification of the Stay Order No. 42429-49430/2013. By miscellaneous Order No. 42823/2013 dated 03.12.2013, the application was disposed of with a direction to extend the period of compliance of the stay order by further four weeks and report compliance on 09.01.2014. Today, the Ld. Advocate submits that they have filed CMA before the Honble High Court of Madras. But there is no record before the Bench that the applicant filed any appeal before the Hon/ble High Court.2. After considering the submissions of both sides, we find that the Tribunal has already extended the period of compliance and no compliance was made. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order.