Simplex Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce

Simplex Industries Ltd. vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Dec 06, 2005

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/41032

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/41032
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: M T K.C.
Decided On: Dec 06, 2005
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Simplex Industries Ltd.

Respondent

Cce

Excerpt

1. this application for restoration of appeal and stay application has been filed on the ground that due to illness of managing director mr.kailash bidasaria, request for adjournment of hearing of stay application was made but it could not be placed before the bench and the order for dismissing the stay application was not contested and the order was passed for depositing the disputed amount. they were required to comply with this order and report compliance on 31.5.05. they did not report compliance and, accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.2. now, it is pleaded that the application of stay as well as appeal may be restored. it was made clear to the learned counsel that stay application at this stage cannot be restored. they should comply with the condition of the stay order and then come up with the application for restoration of appeal. the learned advocate requests that eight week time may be given to him for compliance with the stay order.accordingly, the applicants are given 8 weeks time to deposit the disputed amount and report compliance on 14.2.06. on such compliance, they should file an application for restoration of appeal which will be considered on merits.

Full Judgment

1. This application for restoration of appeal and stay application has been filed on the ground that due to illness of Managing Director Mr.

Kailash Bidasaria, request for adjournment of hearing of stay application was made but it could not be placed before the Bench and the order for dismissing the stay application was not contested and the order was passed for depositing the disputed amount. They were required to comply with this order and report compliance on 31.5.05. They did not report compliance and, accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

2. Now, it is pleaded that the application of stay as well as appeal may be restored. It was made clear to the learned counsel that stay application at this stage cannot be restored. They should comply with the condition of the stay order and then come up with the application for restoration of appeal. The learned advocate requests that eight week time may be given to him for compliance with the stay order.

Accordingly, the applicants are given 8 weeks time to deposit the disputed amount and report compliance on 14.2.06. On such compliance, they should file an application for restoration of appeal which will be considered on merits.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Simplex Industries Ltd. vs Cce Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge M T K.C.