Bhima Ssk Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Bhima Ssk Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 04, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/941985

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/941985
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: The Honourable Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) &Amp; the Honourable Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical)
Decided On: Jun 04, 2012
Case Number: APPLICATION NO: ST/Stay-996/2012 APPEAL NO: ST/287/2012 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No: P
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

Bhima Ssk Ltd.

Advocate For the Appellant : Shri Vidyadhar Apte, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. D.M. Durando, Dy. Commissioner (AR).

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

.....with section 83 of the finance act, 1994. 2. after hearing the learned counsel, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of at this stage. therefore, we have taken up the stay application as well as the appeal together for disposal. 3. the facts of the case are that the commissioner (appeals) has asked the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the service tax demanded along with interest. against the said order, the appellant filed a writ petition before the hon’ble high court of bombay and during the pendency of the writ petition, the matter came up before the commissioner (appeals) and the commissioner (appeals) disposed of their appeal on the premise that the appellant failed to comply with the provisions of section 35f of the central excise act, 1944 read with section 83 of the finance act, 1994. he also observed that the impugned order is without prejudice to any matter pending before any court and subject to the outcome of the decision of the hon’ble high court. against the said order, the appellant is before us. 4. the learned counsel for the appellant submits that on 19//04/2012 the hon’ble high court of bombay has disposed of their writ petition with a direction to make a pre-deposit of 30% of service tax, which they have complied with. therefore, the matter be remanded back to the commissioner (appeals) to pass an order on merits. 5. we have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and gone through the impugned order wherein the appeal has been dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of section 35f of the central excise act, 1944 read with section 83 of the finance act, 1994. the hon’ble high court of bombay has directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 30% of service tax demanded, which they have complied with, and compliance has been reported before us also. in view of this, we are of the view that the matter should go back to the commissioner (appeals) to consider the matter on merits.....

Full Judgment

Ashok Jindal:

The appellant are in appeal along with a stay application against the impugned order wherein their appeal has been disposed of for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994.

2. After hearing the learned counsel, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of at this stage. Therefore, we have taken up the stay application as well as the appeal together for disposal.

3. The facts of the case are that the Commissioner (Appeals) has asked the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the service tax demanded along with interest. Against the said order, the appellant filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay and during the pendency of the writ petition, the matter came up before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of their appeal on the premise that the appellant failed to comply with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. He also observed that the impugned order is without prejudice to any matter pending before any court and subject to the outcome of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court. Against the said order, the appellant is before us.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that on 19//04/2012 the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay has disposed of their writ petition with a direction to make a pre-deposit of 30% of service tax, which they have complied with. Therefore, the matter be remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to pass an order on merits.

5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and gone through the impugned order wherein the appeal has been dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay has directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 30% of service tax demanded, which they have complied with, and compliance has been reported before us also. In view of this, we are of the view that the matter should go back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the matter on merits and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Accordingly, after waiving the requirement of pre-deposit we remand the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to pass an order on merits without insisting on any pre-deposit.

6. The appeal as well as the stay application are disposed of in the above terms.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Bhima Ssk Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge The Honourable Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) &Amp; the ...